Atheism is unreasonable

[Lemonvariable72]

Just so that everyone here know knows he is referring to this scale
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale

[Mister Agenda]

Sure. But how many of them does abiogenesis occur on? What percentage of those result in civilizations. There could be a civilization per galaxy (100 billion civilizations) and we are far from the point of being able to detect a civilization in another galaxy that isn't a Type III civilization on the Kardashev scale.

100 billion civilizations and none of them reached Type III?

Maybe a bunch did. That doesn't mean they have FTL travel or are close enough to detect. How do you detect a Type III civilization from a dozen galaxies away? If anything, being Type III would make them harder to detect. A Type III civilization would make its galaxy dark.

Maybe no civillization is old enough to have achieved Type III. Maybe no civilization is inclined to reach it. Maybe Type III isn't possible.

There are plenty of reasons for us to not have detected another civilization...you just haven't put much thought into them.

---

Sentient life on other planets could have started billions of years ago.

Could have does not equal did. We could be the eldest technologically advanced species in the universe for all we know.

---

entire civilizations could have risen and fallen to dust by the time we gained the ability to even realize the planet is there.

All of them?

Maybe. It's unknowable. This is a case where it shouldn't be that hard for you to admit that you can't know why we haven't found another planet with life on it.

[Alex K]

Again the talk about where the universe came from, or where the quantum vacuum came from. I dare anyone to give me a coherent definition of what that phrase means. I'm looking at you, His Majesty.

[Mister Agenda]

The big bang happened at one particular moment in time. It took billions of years for systems and planets to form.

http://www.space.com/11386-galaxies-form...scope.html
The first galaxies may have formed much earlier than thought, a new study suggests — just 200 million years or so after the universe's birth.

You wouldn't want to live in one of those galaxies. Supernova central.

When were first virtual particles created and why were they first?

Quantum vacuum includes virtual particles. It necessarily exists. It always exists.

---

When you consider how long human beings have been around and how long we have been recording history, in relation to the universe, we haven't even been a heartbeat for the universe. It's not surprising that we haven't encountered alien life in the inconcievably brief amount of time we have been around.

But there should be signs of Type III civilization even if only 1 civilization arises in every galaxy.

Why? How do you know a Type III civilization is possible? If it is possible, how do you know that there should be one close enough for us to detect?

You know the Kardashev scale is speculative, right?

---

Why?

Do you even have any clue of our technical capabilities when it comes to telescopes?

Type III civilization obviously consumes all parts of electromagnetic spectrum so it is not hard to detect it.

Um, that would make it VERY hard to detect.

[dimaniac]

How do you know a Type III civilization is possible?

How is it not possible? Just build Dyson sphere around every star.

[The Grand Nudger]

lol, "just" he says......

[Esquilax]

How do you know a Type III civilization is possible?

How is it not possible? Just build Dyson sphere around every star.

Go right ahead.

[Jackalope]

How do you know a Type III civilization is possible?

How is it not possible? Just build Dyson sphere around every star.

One would think that demonstrating that building one was possible before asserting that building on the order of a hundred billion dyson spheres was possible.

Perhaps you have a prototype to show us?

[pocaracas]

Type III civilization obviously consumes all parts of electromagnetic spectrum so it is not hard to detect it.

Maybe they do, but there's a secret extra part of the electromagnetic spectrum that hides their activities from everyone else.

See, I can make shit up based on absolutely no data too.

They use sub-space frequencies!
Everyone knows that!
If they can make mass travel faster than light, then imagine how fast they can make information go!!

---

Care to share those "reasons"?
All you've shown is "indoctrination".... I know that is a powerful force which convinces you of the existence of an unfalsifiable thing, and is the one major force that convinces people around the world to believe in the existence of the god most believed in any particular region.

Again, I've given 6 arguments which can be used for the existence of God.

Kalam, ontological, design, moral, consciousness, and resurrection.

Kalam is faulty at the premises:

---

---

Ontological is stupid

Design is idiot.

Morals arise evolutionarily.

Consciousness exists... a bit more on that further below, I hope...

Resurrection.... huh?! what is this doing here?!?!

I asked how do you know that some person said a particular sentence?
I even gave you the example of another person saying a particular phrase. Did that person say that phrase?.... Did that person exist at all?
Or... what the alternative?
Think about it!

Just take any famous quote in history...the same question can be asked of that...but normally people don't question those kinds of things, they only put on the skeptic mask when it comes to the Bible.

Patrick Henry allegedly said "Give me liberty, or give me death", no problems there.

But when Jesus say "Love thy neighbor", all of a sudden, "He didn't say that!! How do you know he said it??!!"

The double standard here is apparent.

He thinks... finally.
Now, did that person exist in the first place?

Oh, but you didn't say that he said that.... it was something else:

Jesus said "But the gateway to life is very narrow and the road is difficult, and only a few ever find it." (Matt 7:14).

Care to translate that quote? I can't see any "Love thy neighbor" in there...
gateway to life? narrow?... birth canal?
But... only a few ever find it? does he mean sperm?

It does matter.
The lack of order shows how disorderly your reasoning about this is.
Think about it!

It doesn't matter if it never happened. Think about it!!

Explain, then, under that "if", the fossil record.

Were you there?
Joke's over!
You have no way of knowing for sure how that happened... neither do I.
Thus far, nothing in my life... nothing in the growing body of evidence in all sciences... shows any hint of divine intervention.

As far as I'm concerned, nothing shows any hint of voodoo science either.

How about you stop using your computer and your phone... also, let go of those glasses you wear for reading. Also, tv and countless other details in your life which depend on science, mainly QM.
It's all voodoo and you can't see them in action... -.-'

Why, then, should I assume a god had anything to do with any part of the development of chemistry, biochemistry, biology, psychology, etc... ?

Why should I assume that long ago, when no one was around to see it, inanimate matter suddenly came to life and began talking?

You're still going on with this?
You shouldn't assume it. You should look at the evidence that has been found and which has led scientists to come to that backward extrapolation.
Visit a natural history museum. It would do wonders.... even if the items on display are only replicas (in the best interest of preserving the originals).

Also, Traumatic insemination
also known as hypodermic insemination, is the mating practice in some species of invertebrates in which the male pierces the female's abdomen with his penis and injects his sperm through the wound into her abdominal cavity. You'd do good to learn a few things before you spew your faulty reasoning based on limited information.

Again, you are gave a link which shows how things were after the fact. My question is regarding the origins of the sexual reproductive system and how they could have originated and involved all the while reproducing at the same time.

And you basically gave me a link where organisms were already having sex

Yes.... a link which shows how not entirely compatible the reproductive systems are... unlike what you had asserted.
The origins? I wasn't there... no one was.
What is known is that, at before a given point in time, the fossil record doesn't show any sexual reproduction.... and, after that point, it does show sexual reproduction.
How, exactly the passing from one to the other occurred, I don't know.. and it seems no one knows. But it must have happened.
Unless you want to claim it was some finger snap by some mythological creature... do you?

Have people seen god? Really?
How come many were unconvinced that the man was a god? So much so that they even killed him... according to the story.

Because people do bad things.

This reminds me of an old sentence, spoken by Kirk, James T.: What does god need with a starship?
To which "god" replies: Who is this creature?
Kirk: Don't you know? Aren't you god?

"Aren't you god?", indeed... wasn't the man god?! Could he not have convinced those people far before they had the desire to kill him? Heck... even while they wanted to kill him!
Force hand wave - I am not the droid...oops... man/god you're wanting to kill.
The story is so full of holes, it's amazing you people fall for it!

Now, how can we be sure that the story portrays real events, instead of idealized ones?

We can read books regarding the Historicity of the Resurrection, and we can also watch the many debates on the subject. All of that sprinkled with a little faith, and then we can be sure.

Historicity of what?!
Are you kidding me?!
There's no such thing!!!
Stop reading your biased stupid sources. Read actual archeologists which work in actual Israel!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Finkelstein

Debates?! debates?!?! debates don't attest to the truth of anything! Only, at best, to the gullibility of the audience.

Add faith to be sure... also another brilliant move when you don't want to get to the bottom of reality, but just want to feed your own delusion.

Try again... try harder... think about it.

Like MRSA never happens...
Our grasp of what a million years is is very tenuous... I certainly can't think about it. It's a monstrous amount of time. It's not a god... it's just time enough to adapt to the environment or die.

I see Christians aren't the only one playing the "faith" game.

Knowledge is commonly defined as "justified true belief".... for we can never "know" anything with 100% certainty.
Still, I'll take 99% over your ~0.0000001%.

Then define consciousness, PERIOD.

The sense of awareness. That is the short version. So basically, inanimate matter came to life and became "aware" of things

So matter got senses.
The ability to react to changes in the neighboring environment.
That's not what you want to be calling consciousness, is it?

An unconscious person has no consciousness... Words don't always convey the meaning you think they do.

Right, and a unconscious person isn't "aware" of anything either.

So it's dead matter, huh?

I worship nothing.

Which is your "GOD" given right...

"god given"?
Please, first present god... then start saying what that god does and thinks and whatnot...

I understand some science and it makes sense.

Life from inanimate material makes sense?

yes.
Crystals are well known forms of inanimate matter with self-replicating capabilities. And there are many many many different forms of crystals.

Add some biochemistry to some crystalline structure and it makes sense that you'd get a biological self-replicating molecule. Repeat lots of times.

If not this mechanism, then some other. Amino-acids exist naturally and, in certain conditions of temperature and pressure, they self-organize into cell-like structures.

It makes sense.... scientist just haven't discovered a viable mechanism by which it can all come together and form actual biochemical self-replicating molecules. But, given the available building blocks, it doesn't seem impossible.

Now... the existence of a god... does seem impossible.

I see no god

Then maybe you need thicker glasses

Maybe you need to clean yours.

except in literature or as wishful thinking...
Which sounds more reasonable?

In my opinion, Christianity is more reasonable than any scientific hypothesis that can be used to explain the origins of life, the universe, and consciousness.

It certainly is more prepared to prey on your gullibility... enjoy being wrong!

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Tell you what...I want you do consult any physicist that can help you with the infinity problem. The infinity problem is independent of any bogus scientific experiment or any latest bogus theory or development in science.

It speaks volumes that you believe yourself to be superior after some Google searching and some heavy indoctrination in matters of theorietcal physicists than those who spent their entire lives dedicated to learning and research.

What the fuck are you talking about?

Figure it the fuck out.

It's fairly simple to figure out that you're not in academia or indeed have studied to any high level. 'Brevity is the soul of wit'. It's not our fault that we can't figure out what the hell most of your posts are saying.

Also not what I was saying. The bible is the claim, not evidence for that claim. And the books of the bible were written anonymously, so you have no way of knowing whether they are true accounts or not, as you have no way of establishing whether the authors have good information.

No one living today knows who wrote anything in antiquity. It isn't as if we are so sure of who wrote anything else in history, but when it comes to the Bible, all of a sudden it is time to be a skeptic.

Your entire knowledge of ancient history is based on what you've been told from someone else. You weren't there. We use the same criterion to establish historical truths regarding biblical claims that we use for anything else in history.

Please don't act so puerile.

The bible is only a claim. You can Try and equivocate it to records of governments held in antiquity or to fictional novels like the odyssey, but none of those things are claiming supernatural, life controlling constraints on the lives of every human and neither are they claiming to know how life started or how it will end.

And that's without going into any detail about the blatant falsities contained in the bible, of which there are many.

The "foreword" stuff in the NIV is irrelevant if I am on here admitting that the Gospels are anonymous. Again, I said we have historical evidence, which comes from the Early second century apostles who stated whom the Gospels were written by. Historical evidence = shit that was written down and or passed along to people that were a lot close to the scene than people typing in message forums 2,000 years later.

Lol. No, it's really not.

Arguments give good reasons why we believe what we believe.

Nah. They give reasons, not necessarily good ones.