Did it...and you have some means to demonstrate that this is so?  Please, share, on the way to collecting your Nobel.

(October 30, 2015 at 3:02 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(October 29, 2015 at 9:16 pm)jenny1972 Wrote: i understand what we are debating . i believe an intelligent being created the universe and you guys disagree .  what you have is an opinion without facts and what i have is my opinion without facts . we are both arguing our opinions and both giving reasons why we have these opinions that is what we both have been doing listing the reasons why we believe as we do . im an expert at my own opinions and i know why i have them thats all that is needed in an opinion debate , and ive been listing those reasons . that is the " nature of the discussion " everyone giving reasons why they have an opinion and thats what weve been doing

What you clearly don't understand is that some opinions have more reasoning and evidence in support of them than others do.

Probably because your opinion is bereft of support from reason or evidence.

It's great that you're an expert on your own opinion.  You need to explain to me and others why your opinion is relevant. Absent reasoning and evidence, your opinion is devoid of any gravitas; yours is one small voice railing against reality with your own wishful thinking leading the way.

Thanks, but no thanks.

ok what evidence do you have that intelligent beings do not create complex things i have tons of evidence that intelligent beings are responsible for creating complex creations . my fan doesnt create anything . it does create movement but only because its creator , a human a thinking being , set it up to create movement . my fan doesnt do anything more or less than what a thinking human designed it to do .

Back to pitching straw, Jenny?  Do you still not understand why this is pointless?

(October 30, 2015 at 11:29 am)Rhythm Wrote: Did it...and you have some means to demonstrate that this is so?  Please, share, on the way to collecting your Nobel.

awwwwwwww <333333333

You can't possibly tell me that an explosion took place without any particles now can you?

I'm not telling you anything, I'm asking you.  Again, if you would be so kind, please share with us how you could -possibly- know what you've claimed...and..if it's not too much to ask, after explaining how you could know..demonstrate that you do? You seem to think that the big bang was a firecracker...we've seen this before, in this thread, it's already been addressed. Perhaps you could remove some of my doubts as to your interpretation of BBT while we're at it?

(October 30, 2015 at 11:33 am)Rhythm Wrote: I'm not telling you anything, I'm asking you.  Again, if you would be so kind, please share with us how you could -possibly- know what you've claimed...and..if it's not too much to ask, after explaining how you could know..demonstrate that you do?

I know it because I know that some kind of particles are required for any kind of explosion. I know this from everyday observation

Here again, your comments make me think you might not understand what you're talking about...but you could always elaborate, demonstrate...you know...like you've been invited to do? Your everyday observations, most likely of firecrackers, apply to a point "before" which everything you've ever observed, and the mechanisms behind even your ability -to- observe..existed? You really think so?

(October 30, 2015 at 5:15 am)pool Wrote: I think people have a hard time understanding me because I just give out the answer and not how I arrived at it. I sort of have to lead them to the answer the same way I did in my "What is god?" thread, one which I failed to do in my "Do you have the right to be an atheist?" thread because I just gave the answer and expected others to accept it.
If anyone is interested we can start by you answering a simple question:

Why does a stone come down when you throw it up?

I've already answered this. Perhaps you'd ought to read what other people post, rather than assuming they don't understand you.

Except we're not talking about an explosion.

The big bang is not an explosion. It is a rapid expansion of the dimensions, from a point which contained all the energy in the universe, and some of that would become the matter in the universe, unevenly, so it clustered into nebulae, then stars and galaxies. In those nuclear furnaces was made the heavier elements that would be found in later star systems.

And it's not true that all complex things are made by intelligences. Only ones that violate normal laws of physics and chemistry. Evolution does not violate the normal laws of physics or chemistry. It operates by the standard laws of organic chemistry. When a person makes a watch (or any mechanical thing), they use techniques that go against the normal order of things-- for instance, they apply heat to get metal out of the oxidized ore (or other chemical combinations) that is the normal state of that material, and then apply force to shape it. Not natural.

Some sort of particles are needed for any sort of explosion
For the BB to occur particles would've needed
Some sort of particles facilitated BB
Particles existed before BB
If particles existed before then they followed the "This is how particles interact,period." rule.
"This is how particles interact, period." existed before the BB.

Simple logic