Watch and Discuss...

it would be as if we somehow gave a pistol to an idgenous tribe in south america that we've never come into contact with.
some of them among themselves would reason that it was made or designed.
then there'd probably be some fool that claimed it evolved from the slingshot.

Ive stayed out of this debate because i feel that arguing with trendy and these other dude will make me dumber....

lets say this....

THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE


(well jesus is the truth)

Originally posted by Blackfang so trendy  how did nothing suddenly explode :/ I know the big bang doesn't describe the time before the big bang. but man aren't we lucky that the big bang banged the way it did? I mean we just happened to get a good sized sun. the earth just happens  to be the right distance from the sun. now I'm asking this because I don't know.... do the laws of the universe work every single time without fail? is gravity a constant? and etc.

You see, I like what your saying about the sun, but your looking at it backwards.  The earth isn't a setup for us, we evolved into adaptability.  We are products of our environment, not our environment catered to sustain us.

Originally posted by Blackfang no I mean his entire belief in the big bang at the foundation is chance. like I previously said. not that by chance I believe in God. and I know pascal- wager I read it in middle school. I'm saying there is more proof for a "god" than there is for without one. I chose Christianity because I've seen the results. only a fool (like the one in proverbs) would argue there's more evidence "against" a god. I believe it's the God of the Christians. and that the jews need to download the lastes firmware. sorry for errors I'm on a palm pre and I can't see what I type and it only happens here. christianity works for me and it could work fr all people if they would actually adhere to it. no ex-christian has truly tried christianity, I will wager that.

Where are you getting the notion that there is more proof for god when all the evidence points away from the idea of a god? Of course we don't know for sure exactly what sparked the big bang because we simply lack the technology, but we do have concrete evidence that the event took place (WMAP image, please read up on it instead of ignoring the evidence). And yes, gravity as well as the laws of physics work all throughout the universe. Think of the characteristics of the Christian God, he told humans that the earth was flat, was said to be personally responsible for earthquakes/thunderstorms/volcanic eruptions etc., was clueless about micro-organisms. The christian god was limited to the knowledge of the day, kinda peculiar. If he was truly all knowing then he would surely have known that the earth was round, the concept of plate-tectonics, and would have been able tell humans that disease is spread through bacteria and not him. The problem is that Christians, as well as people of any other faith, always tend to ignore the evidence put in front of them and claim to "know" differently simply because they have faith. It's like still believing in the stork that brings the babies after already witnessing a childbirth. It's complete childish non-sense.

Originally posted by Deadaim Originally posted by Fluffy Fluffington Originally posted by Blackfang and you wager your whole belief system on chance. science is more ignorant than it is knwoledgeable.   Wager??? so your belief system is based on a wager. Pascals Wager actually does exist. Pascal argues if you 'Bet' there is a god you've got nothing to lose but if you bet there is no god and he exists then you go to hell. This is moral teaching?   The is the essence of Religious huxterism ... Come into my used car lot have I got a deal for you. God is Great and he needs your money. I don't make a wager, I ask for proof.   Actually Science makes no claim of knowing ... Science is about learning is  and aknowledging that we are constantly searching for truth.   Its the religious that claim ABSOLUTE KNOWLEDGE! which is the more arrogant?   well your statement and the statements of trendy and tuna dont add up. not that they have to.. but from what ive read the christians in this thread are much more open to debate.. all i heard from the posts i read from trendy was that "science is fact, its unquestionable.. someone used a beaker and test tube and they know its law"   so acctually in this arguement.. you guys are the ones claiming absolute knoweldge. and yes trendy i know you already said you arent but if you read your posts you are.

I don't know how many motherf***ing times i have to repeat myself, I've never claimed that all of science is absolute fact. Please stop putting words in my mouth and actually bring up examples to back up your arguments otherwise go away.

phantaci, i can't wait till you go to college.. you will feel so stupid saying these things after you take biology

i edited my post trendy when i responded to lunchy.

If organisms, animals and plants evolve, why not us?  That arrogant to think we are anything but higher class of animal.  Every thing on this planet is concerned with one thing, reproducing.  We can't be too separate from everything else.

Originally posted by Hey_Look_its_Trendy Originally posted by Deadaim Originally posted by Fluffy Fluffington Originally posted by Blackfang and you wager your whole belief system on chance. science is more ignorant than it is knwoledgeable.   Wager??? so your belief system is based on a wager. Pascals Wager actually does exist. Pascal argues if you 'Bet' there is a god you've got nothing to lose but if you bet there is no god and he exists then you go to hell. This is moral teaching?   The is the essence of Religious huxterism ... Come into my used car lot have I got a deal for you. God is Great and he needs your money. I don't make a wager, I ask for proof.   Actually Science makes no claim of knowing ... Science is about learning is  and aknowledging that we are constantly searching for truth.   Its the religious that claim ABSOLUTE KNOWLEDGE! which is the more arrogant?   well your statement and the statements of trendy and tuna dont add up. not that they have to.. but from what ive read the christians in this thread are much more open to debate.. all i heard from the posts i read from trendy was that "science is fact, its unquestionable.. someone used a beaker and test tube and they know its law"   so acctually in this arguement.. you guys are the ones claiming absolute knoweldge. and yes trendy i know you already said you arent but if you read your posts you are. I don't know how many motherf***ing times i have to repeat myself, I've never claimed that all of science is absolute fact. Please stop putting words in my mouth and actually bring up examples to back up your arguments otherwise go away.

trendy you dumb f***.. you have offered no f***ing proof on anything except reference WMAP, you havent said anything intelectual at all except the same arrogant bull**** and all you have done is referenced opinions of other scholars and scientist. and when i did the same you dismissed it.

i edited my post trendy when i responded to lunchy.

Originally posted by Deadaim Originally posted by Hey_Look_its_Trendy Originally posted by Blackfang no I mean his entire belief in the big bang at the foundation is chance. like I previously said. not that by chance I believe in God. and I know pascal- wager I read it in middle school. I'm saying there is more proof for a "god" than there is for without one. I chose Christianity because I've seen the results. only a fool (like the one in proverbs) would argue there's more evidence "against" a god. I believe it's the God of the Christians. and that the jews need to download the lastes firmware. sorry for errors I'm on a palm pre and I can't see what I type and it only happens here. christianity works for me and it could work fr all people if they would actually adhere to it. no ex-christian has truly tried christianity, I will wager that. Where are you getting the notion that there is more proof for god when all the evidence points away from the idea of a god? Of course we don't know for sure exactly what sparked the big bang because we simply lack the technology, but we do have concrete evidence that the event took place (WMAP image, please read up on it instead of ignoring the evidence). And yes, gravity as well as the laws of physics work all throughout the universe. Think of the characteristics of the Christian God, he told humans that the earth was flat, was said to be personally responsible for earthquakes/thunderstorms/volcanic eruptions etc., was clueless about micro-organisms. The christian god was limited to the knowledge of the day, kinda peculiar. If he was truly all knowing then he would surely have known that the earth was round, the concept of plate-tectonics, and would have been able tell humans that disease is spread through bacteria and not him. The problem is that Christians, as well as people of any other faith, always tend to ignore the evidence put in front of them and claim to "know" differently simply because they have faith. It's like still believing in the stork that brings the babies after already witnessing a childbirth. It's complete childish non-sense.   considering we cant even reach the limits of our solar system.. how are you so certain that the laws of physics are constant throughout the universe? please provide proof..   its just amazing.. you can laugh about someone believing in god.. yet you are certain about the universe.. something you will never have any real evidence on other then someones interpatation and manipulation of things like telescopes and satelite images..   you have faith in science.. its no different.. yet you seem to think because of a few obsessed (possibly crazy) minds interpitation and small amounts of evidence that you are above debate

Once again, science is TESTABLE and supernatural things like god are not so no, it's not faith. I'll give an example, the laws of physics and properties of the universe show that there can be no star larger than quite specifically 1.5 times the mass of our sun that has ended is nearly ending it's life cycle. It turns out that of all the galaxies we've scanned this indeed turns out to be true, we have not found any. I honestly don't have the time or patience to explain how we calculate this using light travel distance/time, Hubble's calculations etc. Another interesting fact about this is that the elements carbon and oxygen did not exist at the birth of the universe, but instead were synthesized inside these massive stars and released into the universe after these star went supernova, thus creating the basic building blocks for life. It IS testable just research it instead of remaining ignorant and nay-saying everything. 

Originally posted by Hey_Look_its_Trendy Originally posted by Deadaim Originally posted by Hey_Look_its_Trendy Originally posted by Blackfang no I mean his entire belief in the big bang at the foundation is chance. like I previously said. not that by chance I believe in God. and I know pascal- wager I read it in middle school. I'm saying there is more proof for a "god" than there is for without one. I chose Christianity because I've seen the results. only a fool (like the one in proverbs) would argue there's more evidence "against" a god. I believe it's the God of the Christians. and that the jews need to download the lastes firmware. sorry for errors I'm on a palm pre and I can't see what I type and it only happens here. christianity works for me and it could work fr all people if they would actually adhere to it. no ex-christian has truly tried christianity, I will wager that. Where are you getting the notion that there is more proof for god when all the evidence points away from the idea of a god? Of course we don't know for sure exactly what sparked the big bang because we simply lack the technology, but we do have concrete evidence that the event took place (WMAP image, please read up on it instead of ignoring the evidence). And yes, gravity as well as the laws of physics work all throughout the universe. Think of the characteristics of the Christian God, he told humans that the earth was flat, was said to be personally responsible for earthquakes/thunderstorms/volcanic eruptions etc., was clueless about micro-organisms. The christian god was limited to the knowledge of the day, kinda peculiar. If he was truly all knowing then he would surely have known that the earth was round, the concept of plate-tectonics, and would have been able tell humans that disease is spread through bacteria and not him. The problem is that Christians, as well as people of any other faith, always tend to ignore the evidence put in front of them and claim to "know" differently simply because they have faith. It's like still believing in the stork that brings the babies after already witnessing a childbirth. It's complete childish non-sense.   considering we cant even reach the limits of our solar system.. how are you so certain that the laws of physics are constant throughout the universe? please provide proof..   its just amazing.. you can laugh about someone believing in god.. yet you are certain about the universe.. something you will never have any real evidence on other then someones interpatation and manipulation of things like telescopes and satelite images..   you have faith in science.. its no different.. yet you seem to think because of a few obsessed (possibly crazy) minds interpitation and small amounts of evidence that you are above debate     Once again, science is TESTABLE and supernatural things like god are not so no, it's not faith. I'll give an example, the laws of physics and properties of the universe show that there can be no star larger than quite specifically 1.5 times the mass of our sun that has ended is nearly ending it's life cycle. It turns out that of all the galaxies we've scanned this indeed turns out to be true, we have not found any. I honestly don't have the time or patience to explain how we calculate this using light travel distance/time, Hubble's calculations etc. Another interesting fact about this is that the elements carbon and oxygen did not exist at the birth of the universe, but instead were synthesized inside these massive stars and released into the universe after these star went supernova, thus creating the basic building blocks for life. It IS testable just research it instead of remaining ignorant and nay-saying everything.

really? so a random explosion out of no where in the middle of no where is more of a possibility then a creator? seems like they are both valid theories

Originally posted by Paw Originally posted by TuNA FISh phantaci, i can't wait till you go to college.. you will feel so stupid saying these things after you take biology i cant wait till u die and you burn in hell! who will be laughing then? hahahha but seriously tho, yall need to wake up and realize your little scholars dont know ****

Yes because 55 year old dirty tired thirsty sand castle building idiots knew a lot thousands of years ago.