i duno why this thread died... it was like most famous thread of all :o
bump
i wana see some opinions ppl!
Printable View
i duno why this thread died... it was like most famous thread of all :o
bump
i wana see some opinions ppl!
Are you kidding? There's 25 pages worth of oppinions. I believe that's a record for this forum.Quote:
Originally posted by deep blue@28 Minutes Ago
i duno why this thread died... it was like most famous thread of all :o
bump
i wana see some opinions ppl!
[snapback]80938[/snapback]
I remember this thread... sort of... How gullible are these people though? Believing that some fairy tale brewed up by ancient peoples, and eventually changing to fit each progressing culture's beliefs, might actually prove to be true?
Religion has been proved wrong time and time again by science. The Aztecs thought Cortez was a god. Almost the entire world believed that the world was flat, and even when it was proven to be round Christians clung to their false beliefs (much like they do now) and killed anybody who thought otherwise. Countless destruction, or "end of the world" theories with set dates have been passed up with no armageddon, no great plague, no extinction of the human race. Seriously guys, give it a break.
whoot now were getting there :D now we just need sum1 to argue that god is real ;p
well hes not :huh:
my opinion. ;)
yup same here
COME ON PEOPLE, ARGUE!
all the religous people seem to have died...
The Church Is Famous For Stealin Pagan Festivals n Turning Them Into Their own
Certain things have happened in my life, and it's not me deciding whether i live or die, so yeah i believe in God, or at least....something of that highness, dunno about giving "it" a name.
I believe.
As much as I was raised to believe in God I really tend to believe he doesn't exist. I think religion as a whole was created to maintain social order and ease the fear of dying....
I think the fact that there are recurring themes in all religions supports my above statement.....I mean really......no matter what your religion....what does your religion tell you.......it tells you to act orderly and promises a sort of "heaven" if you act in a good manor....
So I guess I am undecided....
EDIT: I think I really changed my view on God when my Uncle died in 9/11
I highly recommend the book by Terry Practett called "Science of the Disk World III". It has a very good look at evolution, creationism, intelligent design and so forth. It even goes back and looks at te times of what brought forth people like Darwin, subjects like the Blind Watchmaker, how blind was the Watchmaker, etc.
If your serious about wondering if there is a 'God' or a 'Supreme Being' (without the anchovies) then I highly recommend the book.
Btw, if your willing to postulate about your view of god, then be wiling to read up about how a lot of the main stream ideas that are around today came into being.
yeah education is prefered over speculation any day of the week.
i guess if anyone REALLY wants to argue this, they'll have to do better than simply opinion based banter, which is what most of this thread has been.
I hope maybe we'll have a new member who'll be willing to give this another go. It was a really interesting thread.
What kind of bias is this written from? (you can't really discuss religion without some kind of a personal bias)Quote:
Originally posted by MetalSkin@4 Hours Ago
I highly recommend the book by Terry Practett called "Science of the Disk World III".* It has a very good look at evolution, creationism, intelligent design and so forth.* It even goes back and looks at te times of what brought forth people like Darwin, subjects like the Blind Watchmaker, how blind was the Watchmaker, etc.*
If your serious about wondering if there is a 'God' or a 'Supreme Being' (without the anchovies) then I highly recommend the book.
Btw, if your willing to postulate about your view of god, then be wiling to read up about how a lot of the main stream ideas that are around today came into being.
[snapback]81619[/snapback]
i agree 100%Quote:
Originally posted by XRedBlazeX@Yesterday, 11:17 PM
I remember this thread... sort of... How gullible are these people though? Believing that some fairy tale brewed up by ancient peoples, and eventually changing to fit each progressing culture's beliefs, might actually prove to be true?
Religion has been proved wrong time and time again by science. The Aztecs thought Cortez was a god. Almost the entire world believed that the world was flat, and even when it was proven to be round Christians clung to their false beliefs (much like they do now) and killed anybody who thought otherwise. Countless destruction, or "end of the world" theories with set dates have been passed up with no armageddon, no great plague, no extinction of the human race. Seriously guys, give it a break.
[snapback]81069[/snapback]
no one really belives god really they only want to
Quote:
no one really belives god really they only want to
Yahtzee!
The book is written by Terry and two other notable Scientists in UK (names escape me at this moment). The book is biased towards evolution, as were the previous two books (though their subject matter wasn't the issue of evolution, other science areas).
Even if you beleive in creationism or Intelligent Design, its an interesting read. Mainly because it discusses how a lot of concepts today came into being. The book notes the key authors from 17/18/19 century (and some older) that developed ideas which are used in the creation/evolution/ID debate.
The third book can be seen a tad derogetory at parts, but this is mainly because the third is an extension of ideas and concepts discussed in II and I. I actualy recommend all the books, specialy if your interested in concepts like advanced mathamatics and physics but dont have much more than a secondary school education (I failed eyar 11).
i dont believe anything that is man made .. because as humens our minds r limited .. and we r full of mistakes .. so maybe this book or thoery .. is gonna change in the future .. so its not a source u base ur believe on ... and besides about darwin everybody knows he have a false thoery .. even a 5 years old kid knows that lol
check this site gonna answer lot of ur Quesitons, All Videos u Can see of evidence and science about God existince
scroll Down and u gonna see the videos :`)
Site Here
P.S: i think videos r Always Better Than Reading a Book hehe :`)
as per usual illusionist, you bring meaningful debate and appropriate comments in reference to the comments made previously.
As I have stated above, have a read of the book. Regardless of your view or opinion, the book has some very interesting information that both views will gain value of. I'm not trying to change your views, I'm trying to add knowledge about how the current thoughts on evolution, creation and intelligent design have 'evolved' over the centuries.
Remember your religion and views are not that old when compared to a lot of the other religions. This means there is a history before when your religion started that may be pertinant to this debate (if debate is what you can call it).
Btw, I love your argument about how books are not good because they are written by man. Well your holy book is written by man and you have no proof it wasn't. all you have is your belief that it was 100% correctly recorded revelations from god or gods angel, depending on which verse you use.
ok Proove it that its written by man but after u watch the videos from the begging tell the end ... from the link i posted..Because the videos r my evidence... then u can argue with me .. if ur not gonna watch the videos .. then dont argue with me and dont say its written by man .. PeaceQuote:
Btw, I love your argument about how books are not good because they are written by man. Well your holy book is written by man and you have no proof it wasn't. all you have is your belief that it was 100% correctly recorded revelations from god or gods angel, depending on which verse you use.
P.S: All the Videos R Scientific Proofes .. and u gonna learn alot about our Holy Book when u see the Videos .. it explains alot .... and it explain bout darwin theory as well ...hope u learn something
when i see proff god exists i will belive it
to many CHRISTAIN Freaks tryin to dumb down soicity
religion = main cause of war. and why worship war.?
500th reply btw:)
LOL - You gota be kidding me rite. This guy is jokin. Your telling me, that what i believe in is wrong! WHY? Because of science. LMAO. Let me tell you what science is, all science is. is a THEORY, thats all, its just one big THEORY. And u got tha balls to tell me that religion has been proved wrong many times. WHERE? You aint got no proof to show me, none of the people have on these forums have ever produced evidence to show why i should believe in something other than MY GOD??? And yes, ive been here for a while, and been in discussion with metalskin, ellusionist and unit#43 and they havent shown me evidence or reason to believe otherwise.Quote:
Religion has been proved wrong time and time again by science. The Aztecs thought Cortez was a god. Almost the entire world believed that the world was flat, and even when it was proven to be round Christians clung to their false beliefs (much like they do now) and killed anybody who thought otherwise. Countless destruction, or "end of the world" theories with set dates have been passed up with no armageddon, no great plague, no extinction of the human race. Seriously guys, give it a break.
So u tell me MaDD? What do u believe in? SCIENCE? Thats an even greater joke, because like i said, its just one big theory which can b proved wrong at any time. And when you bring some info on how religion has been proved wrong, not just by stories from your friends or by your opinion, then i may consider, but until then i shall still believe in the God who has control over everything.
lol i believe in God !Quote:
ive been here for a while, and been in discussion with metalskin, ellusionist and unit#43 and they havent shown me evidence or reason to believe otherwise.
round and round we go...
there are a lot of ignorant people in the world, its true. scared of the truth and what might be after they die. afraid that life might ACTUALLY be meaningless. afraid that when we die there is nothing. nothing is hard to comprehend. like space being infinite, our minds cant get around the idea of complete and overwhelming nothingness. so the ignorant live in fear. thankfully they've found religion. so they suck their thumbs and pray to their gods as they sit and blindly follow the blind into a land of eternal bliss believing that somewhere somehow, santa clause is watching over them.
here have a bible, if it'll help you sleep at night.
there, NOW lets debate lol.
If you lack the emotional security and have to rely on religion to sustain you, then you're weak. The weak will die off and the strong will prevail, it's all natural selection.Quote:
Originally posted by KRAZEE+8 Hours Ago--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(KRAZEE @ 8 Hours Ago)</div>Please prove to me that the Earth isn't a sphere, I'd like to see that.Quote:
LOL - You gota be kidding me rite. This guy is jokin. Your telling me, that what i believe in is wrong! WHY? Because of science. LMAO. Let me tell you what science is, all science is. is a THEORY, thats all, its just one big THEORY. And u got tha balls to tell me that religion has been proved wrong many times. WHERE? You aint got no proof to show me, none of the people have on these forums have ever produced evidence to show why i should believe in something other than MY GOD??? And yes, ive been here for a while, and been in discussion with metalskin, ellusionist and unit#43 and they havent shown me evidence or reason to believe otherwise.
So u tell me MaDD? What do u believe in? SCIENCE? Thats an even greater joke, because like i said, its just one big theory which can b proved wrong at any time. And when you bring some info on how religion has been proved wrong, not just by stories from your friends or by your opinion, then i may consider, but until then i shall still believe in the God who has control over everything.
[snapback]83911[/snapback][/b]
All religions have evolved so to speak, from previous religions. The very concept that there might be supernatural powers (in your case, a god) was created by ancient peoples to explain what they could not explain. Today it does the exact same thing, explaining what happens after we die, explaining the creation, explaining the destruction, etc. Science and technology has proved ancient religions wrong and rendered them obsolite, and sooner or later we'll have the technology to prove that there is no afterlife and to say what event actually happened that created the universe and everything. It will be a while, but assuming the human race prevails... we'll figure it out eventually. Untill then, there is no scientific evidence proving religion wrong... there's just no reason to even believe that it exists in the first place :blink:
<!--QuoteBegin-tabloid@1 Hour Ago
round and round we go...
there are a lot of ignorant people in the world, its true. scared of the truth and what might be after they die. afraid that life might ACTUALLY be meaningless. afraid that when we die there is nothing. nothing is hard to comprehend. like space being infinite, our minds cant get around the idea of complete and overwhelming nothingness. so the ignorant live in fear. thankfully they've found religion. so they suck their thumbs and pray to their gods as they sit and blindly follow the blind into a land of eternal bliss believing that somewhere somehow, santa clause is watching over them.
here have a bible, if it'll help you sleep at night.
there, NOW lets debate lol.
[snapback]84024[/snapback]
i cant tell if you agree with me or if you think im religious.Quote:
Originally posted by XRedBlazeX@58 Minutes Ago
If you lack the emotional security and have to rely on religion to sustain you, then you're weak. The weak will die off and the strong will prevail, it's all natural selection.
[snapback]84075[/snapback]
I'm agreeing with you, I'm just also tossing in the fact that that's a really pathetic reason to believe in a religion.Quote:
Originally posted by tabloid@5 Hours Ago
i cant tell if you agree with me or if you think im religious.
[snapback]84109[/snapback]
I posted, and its been about 6 posts since my last one and still you have yet given me anything to believe otherwise. I think the ignorance and ignorant people of this world are people like you who choose to not believe!
You are sayin that religion was created by men? WHO? And how would u kno if u dont believe? LOL - You are saying that religions are false, then prove it! You show me proof and then ill consider, but for now, im gonna stick with tha Bible, oh Thanks Tabloid ;)
Cheers mate, slept real well last nite
And you also will ask for proof on why i believe in the Bible and what it says in there, well its all written in the Bible and once u show me first why u choose to not believe i may open the scriptures and show u why i believe.
This begins the debate -
RELIGION -vs- THE WORLD
well quite a few flaws in here, but i have gone over most of them in previous posts in this thread.
However I will raise one, which is on the subject of science and 'theories'. The word theory is abused and often missunderstood, terms like the theory of evolution is abused without understanding how theories are defined.
We live everyday dependant on 'theories', the theory of pasturisation, the theory of protiens, theory of chemical reactions, theory of amino acids, theory of resistance/voltage/etc.
Defintion of Theory:
A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
or
A set of theorems that constitute a systematic view of a branch of mathematics.
or
An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture
now i know everyone who beleives in a religion will jump on the last definition, without understanding how the word theory is used in science and mathamatics.
The theory of relativity is a widely accepted fact, it has been tested and refined over years and years, and is continualy being tested. that is the nature of a scientific theory. it is never presumed to be cased in concrete that new evidence cannot be held against it to be tested.
This is the oposite of religious beleif, which is determined by beleivers to be the absolute truth and refuse to let anything be held against it in a non biased review of the said beleifs.
So when religious people are willing to look at things from a non biased perspective, to allow thought on ideas that are not 100% the same as theirs, then I know an intelligent conversation will ensue. Unfortunatly what we have here are a lot of people who are just professing their dogma without even considering what the oponents to what their faith espouses state. That isn't due consideration and testing of values held. and with such people, debate is not possible as they are not willing to consider other peoples views, opinions, evidence, etc.
As has often been proven, this thread is a joke as the people who partake are not on a voyage of discovery about what could be true, but are only interested in stating what they beleive is true.
MetalSkin .. plz Explain to me This Theory Mr. Theory science and math ... u never answered me about this thoery and the videos:
"Let us imagine ourselves standing in a laboratory stocked with beakers and test tubes containing all sorts of chemical compounds. Then suppose an earthquake has just occurred upsetting the shelved vessels, sending their contents spilling onto the laboratory floor. It would be a very strange coincidence indeed to find new life forms generating themselves where none had existed before.
You might say, 'Your analogy didn't account for time - these organisms need time to evolve.' We ask, 'How much time should we have allowed? Was there enough time since the beginning of the universe to allow for their self-induced formation?'
Let's hear from Swiss mathematician Charles Eugene Jai. In an experiment aimed at answering this very question, Jai set out to calculate the probability of the random formation of a single protein molecule. Jai 'helped' the situation by assuming the existence of formative elements, and by selecting a protein consisting of only 2,000 atoms (An average protein might consist of 32,000 atoms or more). Jai also assumed that the protein would consist of only 2 unique formative atoms.
He determined the value of probability by considering the size of the material and the time necessary for the random formation to occur. He calculated that the probability of forming even a simplified protein molecule was approximately 1 in 5 x 10 e+320 !
The size of the material necessary to produce that almost zero probability would have been a sphere with a diameter of approximately 6 x 10 e+176 miles - about 10 e+63 times bigger than the imagined size of the universe. Finally, the time necessary for the molecule to form was 10 e+243 billion years. This was far greater than the supposed age of the universe - only about 2 billion years.
He concluded that the universe was neither old enough, nor big enough to allow for the random formation of even a simple protein molecule. It was impossible for the universe to have created itself, and for life to randomly form. We must then consider another course. There is a Creator who created the universe."
This thread was not meant to argue science vs religion, it was meant to argue about the existance of god. Proving evolution wrong does not prove that there was or is a supernatural power.Quote:
Originally posted by eLLuSioNiST@15 Hours Ago
MetalSkin .. plz Explain to me This Theory Mr. Theory science and math ... u never answered me about this thoery and the videos:
"Let us imagine ourselves standing in a laboratory stocked with beakers and test tubes containing all sorts of chemical compounds. Then suppose an earthquake has just occurred upsetting the shelved vessels, sending their contents spilling onto the laboratory floor. It would be a very strange coincidence indeed to find new life forms generating themselves where none had existed before.
You might say, 'Your analogy didn't account for time - these organisms need time to evolve.' We ask, 'How much time should we have allowed? Was there enough time since the beginning of the universe to allow for their self-induced formation?'
Let's hear from Swiss mathematician Charles Eugene Jai. In an experiment aimed at answering this very question, Jai set out to calculate the probability of the random formation of a single protein molecule. Jai 'helped' the situation by assuming the existence of formative elements, and by selecting a protein consisting of only 2,000 atoms (An average protein might consist of 32,000 atoms or more). Jai also assumed that the protein would consist of only 2 unique formative atoms.
He determined the value of probability by considering the size of the material and the time necessary for the random formation to occur. He calculated that the probability of forming even a simplified protein molecule was approximately 1 in 5 x 10 e+320 !
The size of the material necessary to produce that almost zero probability would have been a sphere with a diameter of approximately 6 x 10 e+176 miles - about 10 e+63 times bigger than the imagined size of the universe. Finally, the time necessary for the molecule to form was 10 e+243 billion years. This was far greater than the supposed age of the universe - only about 2 billion years.
He concluded that the universe was neither old enough, nor big enough to allow for the random formation of even a simple protein molecule. It was impossible for the universe to have created itself, and for life to randomly form. We must then consider another course. There is a Creator who created the universe."
[snapback]84921[/snapback]
However, for the sake of arguement:
Saying that the universe didn't have enough time is like saying that trying to guess a 4-letter (number and letter only) password will take 1679616 tries. There are 1679616 different possibilities, but the password will more then likely not be the last outcome you try. Sure the chances are next to nothing, but it's all probability. It could happen in 5 years, it could happen in 10 years, and it could happen in however many billions of years our universe has existed for.
Quote:
Originally posted by XRedBlazeX+1 Hour Ago--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(XRedBlazeX @ 1 Hour Ago)</div>well imo, science should be considered when arguing about the existance of god.Quote:
This thread was not meant to argue science vs religion, it was meant to argue about the existance of god. Proving evolution wrong does not prove that there was or is a supernatural power.[/b]
<!--QuoteBegin-XRedBlazeX@1 Hour Ago
However, for the sake of arguement:
Saying that the universe didn't have enough time is like saying that trying to guess a 4-letter (number and letter only) password will take 1679616 tries. There are 1679616 different possibilities, but the password will more then likely not be the last outcome you try. Sure the chances are next to nothing, but it's all probability. It could happen in 5 years, it could happen in 10 years, and it could happen in however many billions of years our universe has existed for.
[snapback]85315[/snapback]
exact. as an example, roll a dice.
theres a 1/6 change that ull get a 6
but that doesnt mean that always comes on the sixth time u roll the dice. :huh:
that dude should have considered that when i made his theory.
Plus it's also possible (but not likely) to roll a 6 more than 10 times in a row, and it's also possible to roll 100 times and not get a single 6.Quote:
exact. as an example, roll a dice.
theres a 1/6 change that ull get a 6
but that doesnt mean that always comes on the sixth time u roll the dice.*
that dude should have considered that when i made his theory.
A google on Charles Eugene Jai only finds 7 links, all from Islamic supporters using his name to prove evolution wrong.
If he is an eminent Swiss mathematician, as you claim, that used mathematics to dispute evolution concepts, then I would have expected to find hits of more than 7. I also would have expected peer review of his ideas by both creation and evolution camps. I would have expected to find hits that are not purely from Islamic biased postings. From this search I can conclude that the said Charles Eugene Jai never published his findings in a credible scientific journal or opened debate on his theories.
This is what one would call very suspicious.
And your post doesn’t even attempt to answer what I have posted. I know I should be used to this by now, I should also be used to you not stating what you think but posting quotes from pre-prepared Islamic supporting documentation in your side of the debate.
So you guys can happily post away like crazy in this thread, but I will abstain. It's obvious that the idea of an debate about the existence of god in an intelligent fashion is beyond the ability of most in here.
LOL MetalSkin who cares if he's populer .. or he have only 7 links .. u didnt still answer me about the thoery .. i want u to answer me bout the thoery .. that th universe cant create itself .. i dont care islamic site .. not islamic site 7 link journal i dont care .. just answer the Question .. u didnt answer the Question yet !!! Stop making Excuses !!
P.S: and i told u bout the Videos but u still didnt check them out .. i dont care islamic non islamic in a journal no in a journal .. just watch them and answer the damn Question
You quote a source to prove your point but are unable to back up the credentials of the source, the proof of how the statistics were derived, etc.
It's obvious that you complain about people not answering questions when you dont even answer them. Take your own advice Ellusionist, and until you do I will not debate this subject any more.
It's obvious that you dont understand the concept of a debate, and it's obvious you don't wish to learn or question what you beleive.
lol and ur trying to find the credentials of the source .. from Google wow .. i gave u another Good thing about science .. and its one of the Best about ... the Videos .. but ur afraid to watch them i dont know way ... ok forget the Thoery thing .. go watch the Videos .. the Videos have a backup for everything and credentials of the source ... and then come and answer me .. !
Link Again for The Videos and watch from 1st till end:
Videos
P.S: in the Videos .. They Backup Every Scientific proof
u know i believe in that what wanna, i dont need church or shit like that. So like i said, i believe, but i dont call it GOD....
omg... science cant prove religion wrong nor can religion prove science wrong, ARGUING wont change that.
cant u guys discuss without flaming?
Actually science can prove religion wrong, it's just that the human race, in it's current state, has not become technologically advanced enough to prove these "modern" religions wrong.Quote:
Originally posted by dragoneye@5 Minutes Ago
omg... science cant prove religion wrong nor can religion prove science wrong, ARGUING wont change that.
cant u guys discuss without flaming?
[snapback]86031[/snapback]
