OkaiCorne:


It's good to know we can relate without insults again

But is the spontaneity of energy responsible for the norm (image of "God" ) or the defects? If both...then energy is more planned than spontaneous, which goes against the basic definitions of energy.

You need to consider the norm (planned) is in overwhelming majority as against the defects (spontaneous)

Biko no reply me with insults ... na beg I dey beg you o

You started the insulting na. I was calm before you started throwing jabs. And then you became annoying again. Remember you said you wanted to release your Arsenal, and then I released my Barcelona too.

The norm is not the image of God, there is no image since there is no God involved. That was a concept created by religionists and it doesn't apply where energy is involved.

The spontaneity again, for clarity is not the property of energy that makes a decision. It is the property that makes it work without external influence. Please don't mix it.

The property of energy making a decision is due to its randomness. But this randomness can result in anything. Luckily for us, we have been getting most of the good things because energy is sufficient. If energy is sufficient, you get the good ones, when it's not you get the bad ones. But energy doesn't decide which one we get by conscious authority.

Akin1212:


You started the insulting na. I was calm before you started throwing jabs. And then you became annoying again. Remember you said you wanted to release your Arsenal, and then I released my Barcelona too.

The norm is not the image of God, there is no image since there is no God involved. That was a concept created by religionists and it doesn't apply where energy is involved.

The spontaneity again, for clarity is not the property of energy that makes a decision. It is the property that makes it work without external influence. Please don't mix it.

The property of energy making a decision is due to its randomness. But this randomness can result in anything. Luckily for us, we have been getting most of the good things because energy is sufficient. If energy is sufficient, you get the good ones, when it's not you get the bad ones. But energy doesn't decide which one we get by conscious authority.

Can I ask more questions or do we end it here? I still can't conclude on the fact that intelligence and consciousness has zero role to play in the creation process...especially if we use living creatures as an example...

The good thing about this conversation is that it has narrowed out a lot of things without having to quote many religious texts to make certain points as most theists would do.

The summary of our argument ENERGY Vs (Consciousness + Intellect + Energy); which is "God"?

YOU'RE THE LANDLORD OF THIS YARD...so what's next?

@ Akin1212 despite our differences and argument...hope we're still good

@ Graycoder...thanks for your calmness and maturity.

OkaiCorne:


Please be a bit more patient with me sir. I am the type of student that reads and ask a lot of questions... I can understand if you are past your tolerance point

Is it right to conclude that the world is not in order based on exceptions (natural disasters) rather than the norm?

The world also has a lot of places with stability and order ... why conclude based on exceptions?

If we look at things on a large Scale, is the Universe in order (programmed and planned) or in Total Chaos?

Order can be said to be when there is zero disorder. Do you agree?

But there is a reasonable amount of disorder, so the best explanation is to say there is order and disorder. Do you agree again?

Now. this order and disorder are due to a property call ENTROPY.

ENTROPY is the degree of disorderliness in the universe. It is called energy death.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy#Cosmology

Ignore the scientific Jargons at the beginning and skip to cosmology part, you will see something useful there.

In summary, entropy increases and disorder increases.
There is order, I agree but there is disorder. Again, energy is responsible.

You are not being sincere in the comment I bolded above in your posts. You said total chaos and didn't say total order. That's not honest where this discussion is concerned.

Graycoder:


Order can be said to be when there is zero disorder. Do you agree?

But there is a reasonable amount of disorder, so the best explanation is to say there is order and disorder. Do you agree again?

Now. this order and disorder are due to a property call ENTROPY.

ENTROPY is the degree of disorderliness in the universe. It is called energy death.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy#Cosmology

Ignore the scientific Jargons at the beginning and skip to cosmology part, you will see something useful there.

In summary, entropy increases and disorder increases.
There is order, I agree but there is disorder. Again, energy is responsible.

You are not being sincere in the comment I bolded above in your posts. You said total chaos and didn't say total order. That's not honest where tgis discussion is concerned.

With all due respect sir...Order does not necessarily mean zero disorder in the context of what I explained earlier.

There are extremes and there is equilibrium. There is more of Order than Disorder that was the point I was making...

I'll check the link ASAP... Thanks

Graycoder:


Order can be said to be when there is zero disorder. Do you agree?

But there is a reasonable amount of disorder, so the best explanation is to say there is order and disorder. Do you agree again?

Now. this order and disorder are due to a property call ENTROPY.

ENTROPY is the degree of disorderliness in the universe. It is called energy death.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy#Cosmology

Ignore the scientific Jargons at the beginning and skip to cosmology part, you will see something useful there.

In summary, entropy increases and disorder increases.
There is order, I agree but there is disorder. Again, energy is responsible.

You are not being sincere in the comment I bolded above in your posts. You said total chaos and didn't say total order. That's not honest where tgis discussion is concerned.

I said total chaos because you implied life started by accident with zero intelligence or planning involved sir

OkaiCorne:


Can I ask more questions or do we end it here? I still can't conclude on the fact that intelligence and consciousness has zero role to play in the creation process...especially if we use living creatures as an example...

The good thing about this conversation is that it has narrowed out a lot of things without having to quote many religious texts to make certain points as most theists would do.

The summary of our argument ENERGY Vs (Consciousness + Intellect + Energy); which is "God"?

YOU'RE THE LANDLORD OF THIS YARD...so what's next?

Seriously I am not here to convince you of the existence and influence of energy in this universe.

I know it's hard to reach a science-based conclusion since you don't have prior knowledge of science. I don't really blame you.

But when it comes to living creatures, the things you have read from me are not enough to convince you, that's why I would have been nice if we are doing this while having some drinks one on one. Typing and reading can't suffice. I will need to talk about speciation, evolution, natural selection etc etc etc. We have only been discussing Chemistry and Physics. There is more to science than that.

Energy cannot be included in the description of God because God cannot power a generator to work. Energy can. Energy does all things.

And yes we are still good, this is just an online forum.

Akin1212:


Seriously I am not here to convince you of the existence and influence of energy in this universe.

I know it's hard to reach a science-based conclusion since you don't have prior knowledge of science. I don't really blame you.

But when it comes to living creatures, the things you have read from me are not enough to convince you, that's why I would have been nice if we are doing this while having some drinks one on one. Typing and reading can't suffice. I will need to talk about speciation, evolution, natural selection etc etc etc. We have only been discussing Chemistry and Physics. There is more to science than that.

Energy cannot be included in the description of God because God cannot power a generator to work. Energy can. Energy does all things.

And yes we are still good, this is just an online forum.

Energy isn't my problem, I know it's essential...but whether it is the only thing needed to create things...I am not convinced. I take a bow at this point...but sincerely what is your opinion on Modern day Scientific Theists? Are they wrong to believe in an Eternal Creator despite their deep exposure to Science?

OkaiCorne:


Energy isn't my problem, I know it's essential...but whether it is the only thing needed to create things...I am not convinced. I take a bow at this point...but sincerely what is your opinion on Modern day Scientific Theists? Are they wrong to believe in an Eternal Creator despite their deep exposure to Science?

For me, I think believing in God or not is a choice and a decision even if you have all the proofs that he exists or not. You can have all the proofs and still decide what you want to do.
I think emotions, fear, and some other things are considered when believing in God. Some people also say they have nothing to lose by believing in God. You must have read about Pascal's wager.

According to Pascal's wager

“God can’t be proved. But if God exists, the believer gains everything (goes to heaven) and the unbeliever loses everything (goes to hell). If God doesn’t exist, the believer loses nothing and the unbeliever gains nothing. There is, therefore, everything to gain and nothing to lose by believing in God.”
- Blaise Pascal

Most scientists base their belief in a God on this. They have their rights. Some people practice religion because of morals too.
I also think they are stupid because they are not actually using science to its full capacities.
Had it been they have the same God, then I would say maybe they used scientific concepts to find that God.
But many scientists have different gods. Hence they are stupid


But for me, I think I have gone past that fear level. Hellfire is not reasonable to me and hence the fear is off.

OkaiCorne:


I said total chaos because you implied life started by accident with zero intelligence or planning involved sir

But this does not mean total chaos. I already told you it's a RANDOM process which means it can be orderly or disorderly and it can be both.

Graycoder:


But this does not mean total chaos. I already told you it's a RANDOM process which means it can be orderly or disorderly and it can be both.

Alright boss...I have other questions but let us conclude here.

Thanks for your patience...

Akin1212:


For me, I think believing in God or not is a choice and a decision even if you have all the proofs that he exists or not. You can have all the proofs and still decide what you want to do.
I think emotions, fear, and some other things are considered when believing in God. Some people also say they have nothing to lose by believing in God. You must have read about Pascal's wager.

According to Pascal's wager

“God can’t be proved. But if God exists, the believer gains everything (goes to heaven) and the unbeliever loses everything (goes to hell). If God doesn’t exist, the believer loses nothing and the unbeliever gains nothing. There is, therefore, everything to gain and nothing to lose by believing in God.”
- Blaise Pascal

Most scientists base their belief in a God on this. They have their rights. Some people practice religion because of morals too.
I also think they are stupid because they are not actually using science to its full capacities.
Had it been they have the same God, then I would say maybe they used scientific concepts to find that God.
But many scientists have different gods. Hence they are stupid


But for me, I think I have gone past that fear level. Hellfire is not reasonable to me and hence the fear is off.

Although I don't see religion in a good light...my major fear is if everyone has an atheistic mindset...morality might be thrown to the dogs. I think what keeps people in check is a combination of penalties stipulated by the Law and Eternal Consequence such as the Fear of Hell like you mentioned...

Take out the fear of hell ... and watch a country like Nigeria descend into chaos and total moral bankruptcy...

OkaiCorne:


Although I don't see religion in a good light...my major fear is if everyone has an atheistic mindset...morality might be thrown to the dogs. I think what keeps people in check is a combination of penalties stipulated by the Law and Eternal Consequence such as the Fear of Hell like you mentioned...

Take out the fear of hell ... and watch a country like Nigeria descend into chaos and total moral bankruptcy...

Well, I have to agree that religion has its grip on people's moral strength owing to the fear of hell. But religion has also caused a lot of damage that was unprecedented. Speaking of hatred for other sects, slavery among other things. And these damages are far worse than moral bankruptcy.

I think morality is a personal thing. You don't need religion to be moral. But truly it is what most of us depend on when we search how moral we are, due to the fact that we were indoctrinated in it from childhood. I don't believe in God, but I don't go about being amoral.

The law can check our moral banks if it can be tightly regulated, but then that one also has its faults. Hence I suggest parents who don't believe in God can also build the moral banks of their wards from childhood by teaching them morals instead of telling them scary stories of hellfire to scare them into being moral.

when you give birth to an animal and it hasnt taken the first breath - life force, it becomes a stillbirth and may never come into being if urgent interventions are not employed to make it breath. the brain and muscles you have alluded to are there but wouldnt save the animal. This force pervades the universe and gives meaning to life. it is beyond anybody's control but can be cooperated with.
It is an insult to say that the processes are not well coordinated. how? and i shall prove to you that there would be an imbalance with greaT consequences when you "COORDINATE" these well planned processes. Im challenging you right away to expose the so called coordination here .
Science was formed from the experiences of others and the observation of certain natural occurences and patterns in both organic and the inorganic world including occultism,alchemy, as well as cosmic or spiritual laws. so how many of these laws do you know?
im sure you know that water quenches fire but to all adepts water brings forth fire and light and it is not a negation of the fire quenching qualities of water but an independent manifestation . so dont flaunt half baked science as the universal truth when there a million scientific laws you dont know. is not disturbing to your logic that while looking at the cup as half empty and ascribe only evil to the divine intelligence you have refused to attribute to Her the beauty ,forms, consciousness and intelligence to Him? can an unintelligent and unconscious entity give forth intelligence and consciousness. It is a God of our realizations and while you are entitled to your not realizing IT as athe universal intelligence, some other persons have experienced Him especially when all material scientists' claims have closed the doors of opportunity to more life on such persons. These persons have looked up to the heavens for some interventions and the Divine intelligence, the X factor, has surprised us on many occasions by the magic of His solutions. Can you tell such persons that He does not exist? This is a reality that baffles the actualities of material science.
For my ex-lover, as it is in chemical bonding so it goes in marital affairs and relationships: we weren't just meant for each other. Thanks. ;

Akin1212:
i do not need google to think correctly . the best manmade machine on earth is no march to his maker- man who has billions of more sophisticated machines to be churned ouut from the limitless possibilities the divine intelligence has blessed him with. mention any mention any machine that is as sophisticated as human brain and mind and i will tell you you havent seen nothing yet.
can nothing gives birth to something? take time to study the atom and discover a world of pattern,forms,color and intelligence.
Because you don't understand it you concluded it's a factor beyond our control? Never ever say what you don't know. It's a sin against knowledge. And I am still repeating it to you again that not all the processes you have been mentioning kill microorganisms, and the ones that do, do so chemically. Since it happens chemically, it needs an amount of chemical energy to take place. If there is no energy, it will not take place. Whether God is there or not. Energy doesn't depend on the influence of any god. The process that kills the microorganisms in our body is not well coordinated, that's another blunder and fallacy from you. Do you need to go an read about it before we continue? I'll give you the chance to do so.

That being said, man is not the most sophisticated machine in the world. The abusers of science like you will keep saying what they don't know. Who told you that man is the most sophisticated machine on earth? You should google this to see that. To start with, we are not machines, stop using figurative descriptions. We are talking reality here. We are just a bunch of non-living constituents connected by energy interactions. Physical energy, chemical, heat energy etc. And those energies are converted from the universal energy. You need to understand this before you say anything about biological processes. If you don't have a deep knowledge about biological processes you cannot argu it. All you know is that there is a force(which is totally wrong) and then you want to describe what you don't know with the force.

Sorry for your lover who dumped you. To me, both of you are the same. You are both coming from different directions but will arrive at the God junction.
Nobody controls breathe, whether you're sleeping or not. Two types of muscle controls breathe and the overall control comes from the brain, the respiratory centre. I see where you are coming from, my friend. Your lack of understanding of bioilogical processes has blinded you. You obviously think God is the one doing all these things?

I will give you time to go and learn these things before we continue.

Babacele:
when you give birth to an animal and it hasnt taken the first breath - life force, it becomes a stillbirth and may never come into being if urgent interventions are not employed to make it breath. the brain and muscles you have alluded to are there but wouldnt save the animal. This force pervades the universe and gives meaning to life. it is beyond anybody's control but can be cooperated with.
It is an insult to say that the processes are not well coordinated. how? and i shall prove to you that there would be an imbalance with greaT consequences when you "COORDINATE" these well planned processes. Im challenging you right away to expose the so called coordination here .
Science was formed from the experiences of others and the observation of certain natural occurences and patterns in both organic and the inorganic world including occultism,alchemy, as well as cosmic or spiritual laws. so how many of these laws do you know?
im sure you know that water quenches fire but to all adepts water brings forth fire and light and it is not a negation of the fire quenching qualities of water but an independent manifestation . so dont flaunt half baked science as the universal truth when there a million scientific laws you dont know. is not disturbing to your logic that while looking at the cup as half empty and ascribe only evil to the divine intelligence you have refused to attribute to Her the beauty ,forms, consciousness and intelligence to Him? can an unintelligent and unconscious entity give forth intelligence and consciousness. It is a God of our realizations and while you are entitled to your not realizing IT as athe universal intelligence, some other persons have experienced Him especially when all material scientists' claims have closed the doors of opportunity to more life on such persons. These persons have looked up to the heavens for some interventions and the Divine intelligence, the X factor, has surprised us on many occasions by the magic of His solutions. Can you tell such persons that He does not exist? This is a reality that baffles the actualities of material science.
For my ex-lover, as it is in chemical bonding so it goes in marital affairs and relationships: we weren't just meant for each other. Thanks. ;

The argument of using a human being as a basic example of how unconscious and unintelligent energy can produce conscious and intelligent life does not add up. How can an argument add up at the advanced level if it does not add up at the basic level?

My parents are intelligent and were obviously conscious of what they were doing while exerting energy to birth me to life.

I will sign out at this point and watch from the sidelines. Perhaps advanced science can help explain how this is possible.

Graycoder and Akin1212 ... do have a lovely day and TGIF!!!

Babacele:
when you give birth to an animal and it hasnt taken the first breath - life force, it becomes a stillbirth and may never come into being if urgent interventions are not employed to make it breath. the brain and muscles you have alluded to are there but wouldnt save the animal. This force pervades the universe and gives meaning to life. it is beyond anybody's control but can be cooperated with.
It is an insult to say that the processes are not well coordinated. how? and i shall prove to you that there would be an imbalance with greaT consequences when you "COORDINATE" these well planned processes. Im challenging you right away to expose the so called coordination here .
Science was formed from the experiences of others and the observation of certain natural occurences and patterns in both organic and the inorganic world including occultism,alchemy, as well as cosmic or spiritual laws. so how many of these laws do you know?
im sure you know that water quenches fire but to all adepts water brings forth fire and light and it is not a negation of the fire quenching qualities of water but an independent manifestation . so dont flaunt half baked science as the universal truth when there a million scientific laws you dont know. is not disturbing to your logic that while looking at the cup as half empty and ascribe only evil to the divine intelligence you have refused to attribute to Her the beauty ,forms, consciousness and intelligence to Him? can an unintelligent and unconscious entity give forth intelligence and consciousness. It is a God of our realizations and while you are entitled to your not realizing IT as athe universal intelligence, some other persons have experienced Him especially when all material scientists' claims have closed the doors of opportunity to more life on such persons. These persons have looked up to the heavens for some interventions and the Divine intelligence, the X factor, has surprised us on many occasions by the magic of His solutions. Can you tell such persons that He does not exist? This is a reality that baffles the actualities of material science.
For my ex-lover, as it is in chemical bonding so it goes in marital affairs and relationships: we weren't just meant for each other. Thanks. ;

The basic explanation of what you don't know is science. The basic conclusion from your inference is lack of science. I have backed all my claims up with science from the beginning.

I have bolded some statements in your quotes above, please do check them as I am going to address them one by one again with science.

Firstly, When you give birth to an animal. An animal that was living through its mother placenta before birth will have lungs that were not functioning prior to birth. This means before birth, the oxygen and carbon dioxide exchange is taken care of by the mother's placenta. After birth, the baby needs to exchange with the environment for this purpose. I bet you don't know that. You have just been posting life force, life force. What is life force? There is nothing like life force when it comes to science, basic and advanced. A born baby which was using its mother's placenta for the exchange of gases in its body will have to draw its first breathe which happens almost all the time. But in the case it doesn't happen due to dead energy, you have to transmit energy to it.. The inability of this is not called stillbirth. Don't act like you know what you don't know

Now read this link to educate yourself, sir. https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/002395.htm

The mother's placenta helps the baby "breathe" while it is growing in the womb. Oxygen and carbon dioxide flow through the blood in the placenta. Most of it goes to the heart and flows through the baby's body.

At birth, the baby's lungs are filled with fluid. They are not inflated. The baby takes the first breath within about 10 seconds after delivery. This breath sounds like a gasp, as the newborn's central nervous system reacts to the sudden change in temperature and environment.


Stillbirth is when the baby was born dead, not when the baby has not drawn its first breath. I cannot be arguing with someone who is falsifying pieces of information here and there because he does not know what he is saying.

If you will please go and learn science first and then if you want to use science to disprove my claims you can bring it back here but that's after you have learned it.

I must confess, I was disappointed and discouraged after your first few lines.

OkaiCorne:


The argument of using a human being as a basic example of how unconscious and unintelligent energy can produce conscious and intelligent life does not add up. How can an argument add up at the advanced level if it does not add up at the basic level?

My parents are intelligent and were obviously conscious of what they were doing while exerting energy to birth me to life.

I will sign out at this point and watch from the sidelines. Perhaps advanced science can help explain how this is possible.

Graycoder and Akin1212 ... do have a lovely day and TGIF!!!

You are using a logic that interprets thus.

Your parents are intelligent and conscious and gave birth to you and your siblings, of course, intelligent and conscious.
Universal energy is unconscious and unintelligent and it also gave rise to other forms of energies which are also unconscious and unintelligent.

That is where your logic is lacking bro. You don't understand the concept of energy because you don't have orientation in science. We shouldn't go back to this argument. Because you're not ready to learn science.

You have also failed to address where the logic fell back on you.
If God, intelligent and conscious can also give rise to imbecile_, unconscious and unintelligent.
Then there is no basis for arguing that energy, unconscious and unintelligent can give rise to intelligent and conscious beings. No matter what choices are involved.

I hope you comprehend this basic rule of thumb sir.

Akin1212:


You are using a logic that interprets thus.

Your parents are intelligent and conscious and gave birth to you and your siblings, of course, intelligent and conscious.
Universal energy is unconscious and unintelligent and it also gave rise to other forms of energies which are also unconscious and unintelligent.

That is where your logic is lacking bro. You don't understand the concept of energy because you don't have orientation in science. We shouldn't go back to this argument. Because you're not ready to learn science.

You have also failed to address where the logic fell back on you.
If God, intelligent and conscious can also give rise to imbecile_, unconscious and unintelligent.
Then there is no basis for arguing that energy, unconscious and unintelligent can give rise to intelligent and conscious beings. No matter what choices are involved.

I hope you comprehend this basic rule of thumb sir.

What I am saying is...what happens at the advanced level is a reflection of what occurs at the basic level.


Using a human being as an example of Unconscious and Unintelligent energy being solely responsible for conscious and intelligent life doesn't add up.

I leave advanced Science to prove me wrong on this. Cheers and TGIF

Just to add: I think the best set of people you should argue with are Scientific Theists...kindly quote them so we can all learn. I have engaged you to the best of my abilities as far as Science is concerned

OkaiCorne:


What I am saying is...what happens at the advanced level is a reflection of what occurs at the basic level.


Using a human being as an example of Unconscious and Unintelligent energy being solely responsible for conscious and intelligent life doesn't add up.

I leave advanced Science to prove me wrong on this. Cheers and TGIF

Just to add: I think the best set of people you should argue with are Scientific Theists...kindly quote them so we can all learn. I have engaged you to the best of my abilities as far as Science is concerned

You are taking it the wrong way, I and Graycoder made it clear yesterday that, you cannot just come to the conclusion your coming to like that.

When you look at the formation of life up to our level(humans). You will have to consider a lot of scientific concepts. Speaking of Evolution, Speciation, Chemical bonding, Chemical and Biochemical reactions, Natural selection, Genetics, Heredity etc etc etc. These are the coffers of science. You cannot understand based on Energy alone. These are the modi operandi of Energy

The talk about energy is just to acquaint you with what energy can do and its basic property of being involved in everything. You can see from my post to babacele, heat energy was featured again when they said from the link, that the baby draws its first breath within 10 seconds in response to the change in temperature of its new environment. I will discuss with scientific theists, if you know any please mention them

There is nothing if energy is absent, that's why it cannot be created nor destroyed. It is God, only that we don't worship it and it doesn't care.

Akin1212:


You are taking it the wrong way, I and Graycoder made it clear yesterday that, you cannot just come to the conclusion your coming to like that.

When you look at the formation of life up to our level(humans). You will have to consider a lot of scientific concepts. Speaking of Evolution, Speciation, Chemical bonding, Chemical and Biochemical reactions, Natural selection, Genetics, Heredity etc etc etc. These are the coffers of science. You cannot understand based on Energy alone. These are the modi operandi of Energy

The talk about energy is just to acquaint you with what energy can do and its basic property of being involved in everything. You can see from my post to babacele, heat energy was featured again when they said from the link, that the baby draws its first breath within 10 seconds in response to the change in temperature of its new environment. I will discuss with scientific theists, if you know any please mention them

There is nothing if energy is absent, that's why it cannot be created nor destroyed. It is God, only that we don't worship it and it doesn't care.

Boss...that is why I have left it to you and the Scientific Theists to slug it out as advanced science is not my field as you rightly said.

As for me, Energy is a very essential part of "God", same goes for Consciousness and Intellect. These parts are essential and totally interdependent on each other to create the Universe

I do not need to see a SkyDaddy to have that understanding of an Eternal Creator (of which Energy is a vital component).

Cheers

On a side note...if you insist is Energy alone...then you believe in "God" the Spirit which makes you a theist! (na joke o)

OkaiCorne:


Boss...that is why I have left it to you and the Scientific Theists to slug it out as advanced science is not my field as you rightly said.

As for me, Energy is a very essential part of God, same goes for Consciousness and Intellect.
I do not need to see a SkyDaddy to have that understanding of an Eternal Creator (of which Energy is a vital component).

Cheers

I have said if you know of any, please mention them and let them come here.

Energy is a physical attribute. If a God can use energy then it would be seen, if not by our powerful 5 sense organs, then it would be seen by other sophisticated instruments. But how can a God who created our 5 senses not be sensed by what it created? That's absurd. Unlike energy which has not hidden itself, if God exists then why is he hiding?

If you don't need to see a skydaddy, then how do you understand something you don't know? I don't want to go back to the intuition and logic discussion because that's where we are tending to again.

It was nice having this thread alive with you.

Akin1212:


I have said if you know of any, please mention them and let them come here.

Energy is a physical attribute. If a God can use energy then it would be seen, if not by our powerful 5 sense organs, then it would be seen by other sophisticated instruments. But how can a God who created our 5 senses not be sensed by what it created? That's absurd. Unlike energy which has not hidden itself, if God exists then why is he hiding?

If you don't need to see a skydaddy, then how do you understand something you don't know? I don't want to go back to the intuition and logic discussion because that's where we are tending to again.

It was nice having this thread alive with you.

But that is the topic of the thread na...

All the best boss...

OkaiCorne:


But that is the topic of the thread na...

All the best boss...

And while it has already been established that a 100% correct logic is what justifies intuition to be right or wrong. Do we need to go back? I think NO.

We all intuit before we become logical. And a 100% correct logic justifies our intuition.

We cannot add wrong logic(as a result of incomplete information) to intuition and make it 100%, we will still be wrong or uncertain.

[b]Theists who are scientists don't use logic where God is concerned. They call it faith and you don't question faith. [/b]Once you start questioning faith, then it's no more faith.

I will change the topic of the thread soon, anyway.

Akin1212:


And while it has already been established that a 100% correct logic is what justifies intuition to be right or wrong. Do we need to go back? I think NO.

We all intuit before we become logical. And a 100% correct logic justifies our intuition.

We cannot add wrong logic(as a result of incomplete information) to intuition and make it 100%, we will still be wrong or uncertain.

[b]Theists who are scientists don't use logic where God is concerned. They call it faith and you don't question faith. [/b]Once you start questioning faith, then it's no more faith.

I will change the topic of the thread soon, anyway.

You just nailed it boss!

OkaiCorne:


You just nailed it boss!

I have always maintained that we have to intuit, then use logic but the logic has to be 100%.

But you said, even if the logic is not 100%(which is totally an error), we can blend it with intuition...

But if logic is not 100%, then it's not logic and you can't blend it. That's where you're wrong.


No blending, logic must be 100% correct before it can justify your intuition which is fallible

Akin1212:


I have always maintained that we have to intuit, then use logic but the logic has to be 100%.

But you said, even if the logic is not 100%(which is totally an error), we can blend it with intuition...

But if logic is not 100%, then it's not logic and you can't blend it. That's where you're wrong.


No blending, logic must be 100% correct before it can justify your intuition which is fallible

I understand you, but to be honest...I no get energy explain whether Logic and Intuition are mutually exclusive or whether they are simultaneously compatible...

But I understand your point of view correctly.
Any decision taken in the absence of complete details is an illogical decision. However...in life, certain situations can never give us 100% details... hence the need for intuition.

What's most important is making the right decision.

Perhaps a view on certain professions like Soccer, Music, Creative Arts e.t.c. might make things clearer on how logic and intuition works.

Akin1212:


The basic explanation of what you don't know is science. The basic conclusion from your inference is lack of science. I have backed all my claims up with science from the beginning.

I have bolded some statements in your quotes above, please do check them as I am going to address them one by one again with science.

Firstly, When you give birth to an animal. An animal that was living through its mother placenta before birth will have lungs that were not functioning prior to birth. This means before birth, the oxygen and carbon dioxide exchange is taken care of by the mother's placenta. After birth, the baby needs to exchange with the environment for this purpose. I bet you don't know that. You have just been posting life force, life force. What is life force? There is nothing like life force when it comes to science, basic and advanced. A born baby which was using its mother's placenta for the exchange of gases in its body will have to draw its first breathe which happens almost all the time. But in the case it doesn't happen due to dead energy, you have to transmit energy to it.. The inability of this is not called stillbirth. Don't act like you know what you don't know

Now read this link to educate yourself, sir. https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/002395.htm

The mother's placenta helps the baby "breathe" while it is growing in the womb. Oxygen and carbon dioxide flow through the blood in the placenta. Most of it goes to the heart and flows through the baby's body.

At birth, the baby's lungs are filled with fluid. They are not inflated. The baby takes the first breath within about 10 seconds after delivery. This breath sounds like a gasp, as the newborn's central nervous system reacts to the sudden change in temperature and environment.


Stillbirth is when the baby was born dead, not when the baby has not drawn its first breath. I cannot be arguing with someone who is falsifying pieces of information here and there because he does not know what he is saying.

If you will please go and learn science first and then if you want to use science to disprove my claims you can bring it back here but that's after you have learned it.

I must confess, I was disappointed and discouraged after your first few lines.

learnt what? ignorance? that unconsciousness and unintelligence can give birth to consciousness and intelligence?

Akin1212:


The basic explanation of what you don't know is science. The basic conclusion from your inference is lack of science. I have backed all my claims up with science from the beginning.

I have bolded some statements in your quotes above, please do check them as I am going to address them one by one again with science.

Firstly, When you give birth to an animal. An animal that was living through its mother placenta before birth will have lungs that were not functioning prior to birth. This means before birth, the oxygen and carbon dioxide exchange is taken care of by the mother's placenta. After birth, the baby needs to exchange with the environment for this purpose. I bet you don't know that. You have just been posting life force, life force. What is life force? There is nothing like life force when it comes to science, basic and advanced. A born baby which was using its mother's placenta for the exchange of gases in its body will have to draw its first breathe which happens almost all the time. But in the case it doesn't happen due to dead energy, you have to transmit energy to it.. The inability of this is not called stillbirth. Don't act like you know what you don't know

Now read this link to educate yourself, sir. https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/002395.htm

The mother's placenta helps the baby "breathe" while it is growing in the womb. Oxygen and carbon dioxide flow through the blood in the placenta. Most of it goes to the heart and flows through the baby's body.

At birth, the baby's lungs are filled with fluid. They are not inflated. The baby takes the first breath within about 10 seconds after delivery. This breath sounds like a gasp, as the newborn's central nervous system reacts to the sudden change in temperature and environment.


Stillbirth is when the baby was born dead, not when the baby has not drawn its first breath. I cannot be arguing with someone who is falsifying pieces of information here and there because he does not know what he is saying.

If you will please go and learn science first and then if you want to use science to disprove my claims you can bring it back here but that's after you have learned it.

I must confess, I was disappointed and discouraged after your first few lines.

the baby do not breath before its birth no matter how you want to present and the supply of oxygen and blood through the mother doesn't substitute breathing which the young baby doesn't do except it has a life force through its first breath immediately when given birth to. please check the reference below:

m.parent24.com/parent24/Pregnant/FAQs/when-does-an-unborn-baby-start-to-breathe-20161014
When does an unborn baby start
to breathe? · Your womb baby is
constantly getting oxygen and
nutrients, yet he does not breathe
in ...


There are situations when a new born baby doesn't breath at all or show any sign of life unless an experienced expert quickly intervenes please what medical name is given to such - a baby born without breathing?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stillbirth"
In Germany a stillbirth is defined
as birth of a child of at least 500
g weight without blood circulation
or breath. Details for burial vary
amongst the federal states."

Babacele:
learnt what? ignorance? that unconsciousness and unintelligence can give birth to consciousness and intelligence?

Yes, learn the possibility and don't say it's impossible through ignorance. You don't have knowledge of science, you cannot tell us how it works.

Babacele:
the baby do not breath before its birth no matter how you want to present and the supply of oxygen and blood through the mother doesn't substitute breathing which the young baby doesn't do except it has a life force through its first breath immediately when given birth to. please check the reference below:

m.parent24.com/parent24/Pregnant/FAQs/when-does-an-unborn-baby-start-to-breathe-20161014
When does an unborn baby start
to breathe? · Your womb baby is
constantly getting oxygen and
nutrients, yet he does not breathe
in ...


There are situations when a new born baby doesn't breath at all or show any sign of life unless an experienced expert quickly intervenes please what medical name is given to such - a baby born without breathing?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stillbirth"
In Germany a stillbirth is defined
as birth of a child of at least 500
g weight without blood circulation
or breath. Details for burial vary
amongst the federal states."

Now, it's very clear that you don't understand anything from the epistle I typed.

First let me ask you, who told you that an UNBORN baby can breathe? Did you read that from me?


I said an unborn baby exchanges air through its mother's PLACENTA. And when the baby is born, it will need to draw its first breath as a consequence of change in temperature in the new environment(outside womb)

I have had enough of people trying to clamp down on science. GO and learn it first before you clamp down on it abeg, I cannot go another round of trying to teach people science.

Besides, you have shown that you're not even following what I am typing at all by what you typed up there.


Now read this and understand, STILLBIRTH is when a baby is born dead after 24 weeks and not when the baby is not breathing when born alive. A baby born alive but couldn't breathe and dies is not a stillbirth. You should understand these things instead of telling us what you think

Akin1212:



Yes, learn the possibility and don't say it's impossible through ignorance. You don't have knowledge of science, you cannot tell us how it works.

true science look at a broad horizons of explanations and experiences which form hypothesis for further work on which statements of facts influenced by the realities of experiences by design or accidents are drawn. You are too narrow minded to understand that ,and that bro is unscientific but damn inimical to the evolution of science.

Akin1212:


Now, it's very clear that you don't understand anything from the epistle I typed.

First let me ask you, who told you that an UNBORN baby can breathe? Did you read that from me?


I said an unborn baby exchanges air through its mother's PLACENTA. And when the baby is born, it will need to draw its first breath as a consequence of change in temperature in the new environment(outside womb)

I have had enough of people trying to clamp down on science. GO and learn it first before you clamp down on it abeg, I cannot go another round of trying to teach people science.

Besides, you have shown that you're not even following what I am typing at all by what you typed up there.


Now read this and understand, STILLBIRTH is when a baby is born dead after 24 weeks and not when the baby is not breathing when born alive. A baby born alive but couldn't breathe and dies is not a stillbirth. You should understand these things instead of telling us what you think

it is clear you ain't interested in truth for you tried to make mess of my submissions hence I had to include links in my last post which you deliberately ignored, to upbraid your pride when you self acclaimed scientist threw shades at my knowledge of science when everything I have said I have been right.
I had drawn your attention to the fact it is the life force in breathing and not the brain or any muscle that sustains life, and that if this breath is denied a baby as it is being given to despite the presence of muscle and brain, it remains dead or a still birth and there have been several cases of babies born still and assumed dead until a nurse shocks it with a slap or other methods which allows it to taken in the breath of life that pervades the universe. It is you who needs to read carefully.
For example, because you don't understand the principle involved in the Bermuda phenomenon, you threw shade at the Omnipotent rather than asking questions. But there have been a lot of Bermudas even in our folklores of persons disappearing , coming back from strange lands after several years and claiming their disappearance and reappearance happens within few days.