LSD=truth

_________________

atheists are faget
you also seem to follow science rather blindly do you have probes in space taking readings?

thats my viewpoint

but in all seriousness not even i can disagree with you nexX people gonna do what people gonna do and people going to believe whatever in the hell they want and people are ALWAYS going to shove it down each others throats just sit back and enjoy

_________________

I take nexX's viewpoint fully on this

_________________

Ah yes, SLSO. Scientists are just lying to us and all that "evidence" they have is made up. Part of a huge conspiracy from the Devil.

You do know that the Catholic Church has accepted science as real, correct? In fact, they accept evolution. Oh, I get it, the Devil has gotten to the Catholics, as well.

Im Lutheran not catholic
Catholics are worse than atheists dont feel to bad

and i mean if you really want to act like everyone thinks its a conspiracy from the devil then idc its not like i was hinting twords that, science is perfect, the people who use science on the other hand are imperfect.when have i ever said science is made up? All i think is its a little silly to take something as 100% fact without researching the matter first hand(I.E you are not a scientist meaning you can not say beyond a shadow of a doubt that you know for 100% fact that nothing exploded ect ect ect ect ect)

_________________

Ya see, that's the great thing about science. In fact, according to quantum mechanics, there can NEVER be 100% certainty of anything. And that is part of science. Scientists (the people who study science) do not believe that the theory of Evolution is 100% correct. That would actually be impossible (forgetting quantum mechanics) since evolution is a building theory. What I don't see, however, is a huge debate between scientists on whether evolution is true or not. The mass majority (and I'm talking well over the 90 percentile) of scientists (biologists, chemists, physicists, etc) accept that Evolution is the most valid theory when explaining the growth of new species. The most controversial theorists who deviate from the common acceptance are people who believe in intelligent design, and intelligent design still accepts that evolution is true (those are considered the crazy scientists... imagine the guys who actually believe in Creationism, a bunch of zealots in a shack).

The impression I'm getting from you is that since we can't be 100% certain (since scientists are people and people are imperfect), this means that believing in creationism and religion is the same thing as believing in evolution. That is absolutely retarded.

And I'm not a big fan of Catholics, but at least they're willing to accept what scientists have to say.

And please stop claiming that the big bang theory is "nothing exploded". Learn big bang pleez.

The general idea behind the big bang was "there was nothing, then BANG matter became and it was hot, then it started to expand and cool" Even the history channel teaches this. there are some ideas influenced by string theory, wave theory, alternate dimensions and matter transferring from them ect ect however thats not very mainstream or isnt the first one someone hears about it.

did i ever disagree in saying believing in anything is fucking retarded? You follow science as blindly as KC Treat follows the bible. Everyone does it. Congratulations 90% of people who are only 80% perfect think something. This makes me want to believe them why?

lets say God is real for a second and everyone accepts this,cool thats one major change to what we call reality. Would the explanation as to why things grow and how we are today simply be "God did it" in this scenario? No it would be God created our reality and things are the way they are because the guy says so for simplicity of our feeble human minds and understanding.

_________________

um, big bang didnt start with nothing, it started with a VERY highly condensed very small ball of matter

_________________

If God existed and guided evolution, that would help the intelligent designers, not creationists. You saying that evolution isn't true is still you not accepting science. Why believe in magnetism and thermodynamics but all of a sudden say "evolution is just a theory, so i'll just believe in creationism"? I do not follow science blindly. I was skeptical about evolution when I was in Middle School, but as I studied up on the merits of it, it started making perfect sense. When you add biology and genealogy, you can see exactly how evolution works. It's not just scientists saying "evolution is the answer... trust me". They give you everything you need to know. What have religious leaders given you? A bible.

call me crazy but i think intelligent design = creationism seeing as how God is so intelligent the debate trying to separate old earth and young earth is rather silly both sides forget the point they are trying to argue. IMO they belong in the same category
stop trying to twist my words i said macro evolution is untrue micro evolution is a scientific fact, not theory like macro. In the study of Ecoli they found that the cells mutated to adapt to its surroundings, then scientists go to say "BEHOLD EVOLUTION! SCIENCE WILLS IT"! tell me where did the very first strand of DNA/cells originate from? i have yet to have a atheist answer me this .I know how evolution works, i just so happen to think its a load of bullshit brought on because a couple of people got buttranched at the church and wanted to start a rebellion.

Magnetism and nuclear thermodynamics have tangible cause and effects that we can observe, Macro evolution doesnt.Macro evolution is looking at some fossils and saying "yup this little guy used to be a fish/squirrel hybrid, science wills it." if you want to observe macro evolution watch a newt for the next 1 million years and see if it changes into a lepord

They give you everything you need to know? funny the church gives you everything you need to know about creation-ism. sounds kind of familiar to something you just said


and AFH the theory you are thinking of is matter you are thinking of hit some other matter at the speed of light and now everything is how it is, if this were true every time i hit the light switch in the bathroom id create another universe or at least a universe shattering explosion. In this situation the nothing exploded into everything theory works better to their advantage

_________________

actully the force of that explosion was made from a condensed form of ALL the matter in the universe, so not exactly, also, it didnt explode from something hitting it, it exploded becuase it was so damn unstable



also, the first dna cells were formed in this order, massive lightning and struck the extrmely hot parts of the planet, and deposits of certain elements started to form, these elements started to gather up and link to form amino acid, which further clumped together to form specific protieans, which then atracted themsleves in such a way that it formed DNA strands, which are made of protiens made form amino acids made from complex or not-complex mixtures of elements, there you go, i truly cant beleive im the first to tell you that

_________________

Did someone say prove that the Gods exist? *perk*

Okai, thats easy, follow the bouncing ball.. balls.. protons.. ball.. whatever.

Here's the deal.

Quantum physics states that for every action there must be an observer. This observer changes the action just by observing it.
Now there was at one point if you're sciency a big bang, non? Okai ^,^ So there was this first action. But there was no "life" as we know it at this time, right?

So without life, who was there to observe this first action of the cosmos?
I would propose that it was observed, and then that this observer split itself apart into many pieces and watched as this first ballooning creation evolved.

But however you see it.. If there was a first action before there was sentient life and you think Quantum Physics is right, then you must accept a prime observer who either split if you're a polytheist like me, or stayed as one if you're a monotheist. But if it stayed in one piece, then where did our souls come from? Or.. maybe just like the big bang the original observer broke up into pieces large and small and flung itself across the universe..

But maybe just maybe like our DNA each small piece of the observer contains the blueprint of the whole. If that is the case, what does that make us? What can we become? Just submitted for your consideration.

Hold on, because you have not read a theory on where DNA came from, this means that us Atheists are wrong for refusing to believe in something with NO evidence to back it? Atheism isn't saying "God doesn't exist", that is up to the individual atheist. Atheism is saying "I do not believe in God". This is a view based on reasoning. The church does not provide any science or reasoning for why God is real. They merely say "faith" and give you a bible filled with stories. No science behind this what-so-ever. The idea that you are still trying to compare it to the theory of evolution shows how you still know little about evolution.

And what, Micro-Evolution shows that cells have the ability to adapt to its surroundings by even changing itself, or mutation. Macro-Evolution is an expansion on that theory. We see that species exist now that have not existed before YET DNA is very similar in some species that happen to have similar attributes. Just how we are closely related to mammals because we came from mammals. Creationism says that God created man in God's image and put him on the planet and when he got lonely God created a woman from his rib. Intelligent Design (theories these days, at least) says that evolution is all true, but it was guided by a deity. In order to be a Creationist, you would have to believe in a personal God and all of those stories that the church gives you about why we're here and God's plan and bullshit. Intelligent Design is a corrupted theory, of course (especially since there is no evidence to support it), but it still accepts evolution as true. They just believe that there was a purpose for it given by some supernatural force.

:/ besides, i provided a theroy anyways, also, reign your theroy sounds liek another one not based upon facts but instead upon philosophy

_________________

I don't think it'll ever be possible to prove or disprove the existence of god. I'm agnostic myself.

I've heard one or two people use the argument that the energy needed to create the Big Bang could only have been supplied by a god, since energy can't be destroyed or created by us.