God Is Real

[Minimalist]

The theory of evolution seems to be hinged on the assumption that life came from a single cell organism that was suddenly created by this mass bang effect

So, to make an incredibly long and boring story short....you don't know anything at all about evolution.

I'd suggest you read some real books on the subject ( translation - something not written by creationist assholes ) and get back to us.

[KdThaKing]

It's simple. Do not believe something unless it comes from a source you trust, you have seen it for yourself or you understand the mechanics behind it.

For example, I know that gear ratio dictates the output of a gear train.

I know this because Mr. Lane told me and he is the man.

I know this because I fucked up enough gear trains to see it for myself.

I know this because I understand how all of the gears in a gear train, the speed of the input gear, the size of their teeth and the number of their teeth dictate output, to put it simply. I've done the math, I've seen the math and I have applied the math. I also hate the math.

Long story short, people in most fields of science are not guessing. They have experienced at least two of the three above criteria before they say, "Hey, that's how it works." in most cases.

Before there was anything created by man,there had to be an idea to create it.Either men were smarter back when the world first came about or it wasnt just by trail and error they got things right.Try making something out of nothing and see how much intelligence you use.The bases that we use today for discovering new things comes from systems designed that the roots of can be traced back to the start of time.so therefore the people back in time must have had the utmost intellect to create a system of study and thinking patterns from non-existent information,correct?

[Shell B]

Before there was anything created by man,there had to be an idea to create it.Either men were smarter back when the world first came about or it wasnt just by trail and error they got things right.Try making something out of nothing and see how much intelligence you use.The bases that we use today for discovering new things comes from systems designed that the roots of can be traced back to the start of time.so therefore the people back in time must have had the utmost intellect to create a system of study and thinking patterns from non-existent information,correct?

In short, no. Here's the long of it:

Before there was anything created by man,there had to be an idea to create it.

Why? Do you have an idea whenever you take a dump? Are you like, I must digest this food and crap it out? No. The process happens without you having an idea or anyone else for that matter.

Either men were smarter back when the world first came about or it wasnt just by trail and error they got things right.

Why? You're posting conclusions without saying at all why it has to be that way. That is like me saying, "Cave woman had huge boobs." with absolutely nothing to back it up. Furthermore, when the world first came about, there were no men. Once there were humans, trial and error played a huge role in how they got things done. It still does, as a matter of fact.

Try making something out of nothing and see how much intelligence you use.

If you are making something out of "nothing," you can't use intelligence. Then, it wouldn't come from nothing.

The bases that we use today for discovering new things comes from systems designed that the roots of can be traced back to the start of time.

I'll assume you mean in the history of mankind and go from there. No, it cannot be traced back to the start of time. We use countless ways to discover things. Exploration, mathematics, philosophy, application . . . these are just a few of the ways we discover things. Even in your belief system, the first men and women did not understand these things or use them to discover things, with the exception of exploration. Remember the tree of knowledge? Yeah, you cannot even keep your beliefs straight.

so therefore the people back in time must have had the utmost intellect to create a system of study and thinking patterns from non-existent information,correct?

Da-uhhhhh, what?

[Lehrling]

So what evidence doesnt support then thats as good as saying that it doesnt exist?I think in order to be a freethinker you must first acknowledge the thought that anything is possible.

Like I admit god is possible, yes.
I just see it as very improbable, so I reject it.

If I was to place my faith in modern science then my faith would only be limited to what other people discover in this day in age and in the lifespan that i have.

Faith and Science are mutually exclusive.

People a long time ago believed the earth was flat and they tried to prove numerous theories in which they proved at the time but it was proven to be false later on.Like people say oil comes from dead dinosaurs and such but oil actually regenerates itself like every other natural resource.If i was a freethinker also i would consider not believing anything that people tell me because of the simple fact that people could intentionally tell me something wrong as a manipulation tactic.I would say to myself,If i havent been hands on with the study then what sense does it make to believe anything that comes from another person who may or may not have my best interest at heart.Hence a fact is much more than what people acknowledge it is the truth and the only truth.What if one day scientists discover God was true all along?What if the scientists main purpose for entering into science was to try to find an alternative way to not involve God in the equation but steal the glory from Him and deliver it unto the "scientist".Thats an open thought

It's an open thought, yes; but not a practical or likely one.

Science changes because it is self-correcting; it learns. That is why it is so spectacular; it only gets more informed.

[Erinome]

It's simple. Do not believe something unless it comes from a source you trust, you have seen it for yourself or you understand the mechanics behind it.

For example, I know that gear ratio dictates the output of a gear train.

I know this because Mr. Lane told me and he is the man.

I know this because I fucked up enough gear trains to see it for myself.

I know this because I understand how all of the gears in a gear train, the speed of the input gear, the size of their teeth and the number of their teeth dictate output, to put it simply. I've done the math, I've seen the math and I have applied the math. I also hate the math.

Long story short, people in most fields of science are not guessing. They have experienced at least two of the three above criteria before they say, "Hey, that's how it works." in most cases.

Before there was anything created by man,there had to be an idea to create it.Either men were smarter back when the world first came about or it wasnt just by trail and error they got things right.Try making something out of nothing and see how much intelligence you use.The bases that we use today for discovering new things comes from systems designed that the roots of can be traced back to the start of time.so therefore the people back in time must have had the utmost intellect to create a system of study and thinking patterns from non-existent information,correct?

Same thing from all the theists. How did something come from nothing? Believe it or not, there was matter before cognitive perception. Who made the matter? Who made the maker of the matter? Who made the maker of the maker of the matter?

Can you not concede that your god is something? If so, did he come from nothing?

What you really want is the answer to the question "why?". I like the way Dawkin's answers that question.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSZ_fsG5uMg

[KdThaKing]

It's simple. Do not believe something unless it comes from a source you trust, you have seen it for yourself or you understand the mechanics behind it.

For example, I know that gear ratio dictates the output of a gear train.

I know this because Mr. Lane told me and he is the man.

I know this because I fucked up enough gear trains to see it for myself.

I know this because I understand how all of the gears in a gear train, the speed of the input gear, the size of their teeth and the number of their teeth dictate output, to put it simply. I've done the math, I've seen the math and I have applied the math. I also hate the math.

Long story short, people in most fields of science are not guessing. They have experienced at least two of the three above criteria before they say, "Hey, that's how it works." in most cases.

Before there was anything created by man,there had to be an idea to create it.Either men were smarter back when the world first came about or it wasnt just by trail and error they got things right.Try making something out of nothing and see how much intelligence you use.The bases that we use today for discovering new things comes from systems designed that the roots of can be traced back to the start of time.so therefore the people back in time must have had the utmost intellect to create a system of study and thinking patterns from non-existent information,correct?

Same thing from all the theists. How did something come from nothing? Believe it or not, there was matter before cognitive perception. Who made the matter? Who made the maker of the matter? Who made the maker of the maker of the matter?

Can you not concede that your god is something? If so, did he come from nothing?

What you really want is the answer to the question "why?". I like the way Dawkin's answers that question.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSZ_fsG5uMg

What answer can science ever prove where did the matter come from?

[Erinome]

If you are truly interested to know, I suggest clicking the link below, and watching that video.

http://www.ted.com/talks/neil_turok_make..._wish.html

There are other theories, and since we are advancing science/technology on a daily basis, the only limit to what we can prove is how many facts there are to know.

The whole video is not about the origin of matter, but the theory he presents in the video is one of many. I also want you to listen to the man when he says that scientists try to prove their own theories wrong. That's the difference between science and religion. Religion wants to be right without even thinking about it.

[frankiej]

Until you see an ape transform into a human then you cant conclude it to be a fact.The same could be said by you guys about GOD.so therefore believing we came from apes could be in the "Logical" perspective just as silly as believing in a GOD.

I wasn't going to say anything... until you said this.

You really have no clue what you are talking about. You obviously have almost no understanding of evolution.

I can't let you get away with such stupidity.

The amount of evidence showing that we share a common ancestor with the apes in the world today is gargantuan... As previously mention, things like DNA just strengthen the idea... Every primate fossil found backs it up.
Oh and if you didn't know, every fossil is a transitional form... You will never see an "ape transform into a human", that isn't the way things work, that is fucking retarded.

[KdThaKing]

Until you see an ape transform into a human then you cant conclude it to be a fact.The same could be said by you guys about GOD.so therefore believing we came from apes could be in the "Logical" perspective just as silly as believing in a GOD.

I wasn't going to say anything... until you said this.

You really have no clue what you are talking about. You obviously have almost no understanding of evolution.

I can't let you get away with such stupidity.

The amount of evidence showing that we share a common ancestor with the apes in the world today is gargantuan... As previously mention, things like DNA just strengthen the idea... Every primate fossil found backs it up.
Oh and if you didn't know, every fossil is a transitional form... You will never see an "ape transform into a human", that isn't the way things work, that is fucking retarded.

It is inconceivable to think that things evolve from the same DNA at a different rate of speed or evolution.Why is there so much a variety of different life?what i mean is why are there monkeys,elephants,giraffes,fish,birds,and even humans?and why do they all work together to play very important roles in each others lifes?how do trees produce oxygen and take in carbon dioxide which we produce?how is it that we need the very nutrients that are found naturally like protein etc to survive?If all DNA already had the capabilities of life in it then why do we need to sustain it outside of ourselves?why do we have to eat foods high in nutrients and meats high in proteins to survive if in fact DNA can survive on its own long enough to mutate and produce in this mass variety of internal and external embodyments?

[frankiej]

OK, if you are asking questions like that, then you should genuinely research it all... You obviously know VERY little scientific things at all.