wirinet:

What is the ad hominem fallacy here , it is apparent you have no idea of elementary geography. Instead of you to enrol back to secondary school ( at least SSS) to learn elementary geography and some sciences, you are asking me to teach you star and planetary formation. You think I have the time to waste.

So the origin of the universe is now taught in secondary school geography?

Wow!

Anyway, bye.

DoctorAlien:
[s][/s]

Off the point.

And, please, pretend to be civil, if you would quote me.

I promise never to quote you again, sorry for trying to discus science with you. I get annoyed and emotional when someone try to pass their religious dogma as science.
I feel that the only way future generations can escape the poverty and sufferings inherent in African societies is for our children and youth to embrace science and technology not more religious dogma.
So I arrest my case.

wirinet:

I promise never to quote you again, sorry for trying to discus science with you. I get annoyed and emotional when someone try to pass their religious dogma as science.
I feel that the only way future generations can escape the poverty and sufferings inherent in African societies is for our children and youth to embrace science and technology not more religious dogma.
So I arrest my case.

I don't know why I find this post funny

CoolUsername:


The Universe itself didn't pop into existence. It expanded from a single point. What came before that is unknown.

Now it is possible (but improbable) for a single particle to pop into existence and expand but it is infinitely less probable for every single particle to pop out at a go, isn't it? Believe it or not, research is going in this very area because theoretically there's still a chance.

Theoretically lol, you gat me cracking these Nairaland atheists ehn! Theoretical not actual issokai kontinue. It's Sunday morning I wanna go and celebrate my God, the cause of everything living and the non-living
Care to join me?

[quote author=taurus25 post=50993057]
kick started, not necessarily "created". It may be what and not who you know


The Organized system of operation in the universe seems to disagree with the fact that, the force behind it's creation was a physical entity, For example, I ask myself why the ozone layer is present in the earth's atmosphere, If there is no reason for life, there should be no reason to preserve life.





[/quote

CoolUsername:


The Universe itself didn't pop into existence. It expanded from a single point. What came before that is unknown.

Now it is possible (but improbable) for a single particle to pop into existence and expand but it is infinitely less probable for every single particle to pop out at a go, isn't it? Believe it or not, research is going in this very area because theoretically there's still a chance.

Out of nothing, nothing comes.
a particle expanded from a single point?
what particle?
what caused it to expand to the extent of creating the universe and all its inhabitants?
or do you now believe in miracles?

peacesamuel94:


Out of nothing, nothing comes.
a particle expanded from a single point?
what particle?
what caused it to expand to the extent of creating the universe and all its inhabitants?
or do you now believe in miracles?

Out of nothing, nothing comes? It has been observed that particles do, in fact flicker in and out of existence. We both have the same dilemma here, if the Universe requires a designer, then why doesn't the designer require one?

As to what caused the Big Bang. Nobody is sure yet. And I don't believe in miracles. Whatever it was is most likely to just be physics.

Like I said though, it is more probable for a fundamental unit of the universe to pop into existence than for a designer to do the same.

taurus25:

Atleast the little he knows is substanciated with evidence.

what evidence?

[quote author=CoolUsername post=51002503]
. We both have the same dilemma here, if the Universe requires a designer, then why doesn't the designer require one?


Not when the Grand designer was also behind the creation of Time and space. The law of cause and effect is only functional in the realm of time. God exists in timeless eternity, so He had no beginning neither does He have an end.
Leaving us with the conclusion that He had no reason to be created.

[quote author=peacesamuel94 post=51002725][/quote]

So, if the precursor to the Universe existed before the time (time started at the Big Bang), then it also has no reason to be created.

CoolUsername:


So, if the precursor to the Universe existed before the time (time started at the Big Bang), then it also has no reason to be created.

The precursor to the Universe is whom the Theists refer to as God

Lol you thiests atheists don't say the universe came from nothing
We don't know how it came to be yet. And that is agnosticism
But it doesn't make sense to just believe in one Jewish deity
-he created the earth in 3 days but he created the stars in one day. One teaspoon of matter from a neutron star would weigh hundreds and thousands of tonnes but apparently the bible writers assumed that stars were little dots in the sky
Lol comedy
If we should just sit down and say godddidit I don't think we'd have understood the universe as well as we do
It's you thiests that say something came from nothing( basically a Jewish magic man created the universe from nothing)
Look man I'm going for an astrophysics masters program next year. The universe is too huge too too huge for you to think
-you are the only life forms in the entire universe- this is mathematically impossible- you can Drake equation for more info( this equation was for the milky way alone) so imagine the possibilities with the distant universe
-the universe was made for you
When Jesus comes back he didn't tell you christians you'll be going on a tour round the Cosmos. Rather you'll be on a "new earth" This is pretty lame if you ask me.
We don't know how the universe came to be but we are finding out. The summary is reality is too interesting for me to live in ignorance. Do you know what you guys are doing. You are putting God in the areas you don't understand
The God of the gaps
And that's not going to help you.
Neil degrasse Tyson said "if you want to keep on putting God into things you don't understand then God will forever remain a receeding pocket of scientific ignorance"

CoolUsername:
The laws of physics are just a method of describing the way things happen in the universe.

Normal physics is used to describe events on the atomic level and up but it isn't absolute.

Once we get to the subatomic level, the laws of normal physics get broken all willy-nilly and we describe that as quantum mechanics. Here, particles pop in and out is existence for no reason.

The problem with these laws is that they make for an extremely chaotic Universe, there is no rhyme or reason to most events and a lot of phenomena are caused by pure luck. Therefore, there is little evidence pointing towards a Grand Design. But some insist that such a complex Universe cannot be an accident.

By that logic, then a Grand Designer couldn't have occurred by accident too, so wouldn't it require one itself? If it does, we go into an infinite regress. If it doesn't, then what property does it possess to make it so and why isn't that property applicable to the Universe or some precursor?

The only reason why we're here asking whether all this could be a coincidence is because, well... we are here. We cannot know the number of 'failed' outcomes before us if there were even any failed outcomes before us.

But what about a god who started the process but only uses natural process to perform its actions? Well, such a god would be apathetic, impersonal and extremely chaotic, then why call it a God?

Sorry for the long rant but I just wanted to show you I (an agnostic atheist) address all these existential questions. This is purely my logic, different people will come up their own conclusions and that's fine. It is only when people claim to know the answer for certain that I will ask for proof.

Quite a point you have noted, but do not forget that all conventions of Physics only began with the creation of the universe and so, no known conventional law either theoretical or empirical can quantify pre-creation events, even quantum mechanics or quantum Kyra dynamics.
Causes only precede their effects in spacetime and God existing outside spacetime would make him uncaused.

peacesamuel94:


The precursor to the Universe is whom the Theists refer to as God

Isn't that a weak definition? An apathetic, impersonal First Cause shows no indication of a living being.

lordnicklaus:

Quite a point you have noted, but do not forget that all conventions of Physics only began with the creation of the universe and so, no known conventional law either theoretical or empirical can quantify pre-creation events, even quantum mechanics or quantum Kyra dynamics.
Causes only precede their effects in spacetime and God existing outside spacetime would make him uncaused.

If causes only precede their effects inside space-time, then how can God, who exists outside space-time be its precursor?

CoolUsername:


Isn't that a weak definition? An apathetic, impersonal First Cause shows no indication of a living being.

What makes you think so?

wirinet:

Why are you so fixated with who and him? You are so delusional that you cannot understand that a Jewish man with a big diick cannot create the universe.
You, the earth, the solar system and even the milky way galaxy is infinitesimal as far as the universe is concerned.

why not answer his question?

peacesamuel94:


Out of nothing, nothing comes.
a particle expanded from a single point?
what particle?
what caused it to expand to the extent of creating the universe and all its inhabitants?
or do you now believe in miracles?

tell them!!!

jonbellion:
Lol you thiests atheists don't say the universe came from nothing
We don't know how it came to be yet. And that is agnosticism
But it doesn't make sense to just believe in one Jewish deity
-he created the earth in 3 days but he created the stars in one day. One teaspoon of matter from a neutron star would weigh hundreds and thousands of tonnes but apparently the bible writers assumed that stars were little dots in the sky
Lol comedy
If we should just sit down and say godddidit I don't think we'd have understood the universe as well as we do
It's you thiests that say something came from nothing( basically a Jewish magic man created the universe from nothing)
Look man I'm going for an astrophysics masters program next year. The universe is too huge too too huge for you to think
-you are the only life forms in the entire universe- this is mathematically impossible- you can Drake equation for more info( this equation was for the milky way alone) so imagine the possibilities with the distant universe
-the universe was made for you
When Jesus comes back he didn't tell you christians you'll be going on a tour round the Cosmos. Rather you'll be on a "new earth" This is pretty lame if you ask me.
We don't know how the universe came to be but we are finding out. The summary is reality is too interesting for me to live in ignorance. Do you know what you guys are doing. You are putting God in the areas you don't understand
The God of the gaps
And that's not going to help you.
Neil degrasse Tyson said "if you want to keep on putting God into things you don't understand then God will forever remain a receeding pocket of scientific ignorance"

can you stop dodging?

you guys will just come out as atheists, when hit you guys so hard in arguments you resort to becoming agnostic. COWARDS!!

Everyone knows that the core of atheism is NATURALISM, where everything is believed to have come through natural processes. so, what's your Point?

peacesamuel94:


What makes you think so?

This 'god's' attributes are indistinguishable from natural processes and blind chance.

promise10:


can you stop dodging?

you guys will just come out as atheists, when hit you guys so hard in arguments you resort to becoming agnostic. COWARDS!!

Everyone knows that the core of atheism is NATURALISM, where everything is believed to have come through natural processes. so, what's your Point?

must you always be insane?
Does saying ''i dont know'' make him less of a naturalist?

---

some atheists do believe in the supernatural.

promise10:


can you stop dodging?

you guys will just come out as atheists, when hit you guys so hard in arguments you resort to becoming agnostic. COWARDS!!

You seemed pained that people reject your Jewish tribal god.

Everyone knows that the core of atheism is NATURALISM, where everything is believed to have come through natural processes. so, what's your Point?

And the core of theism is what, SUPERNATURALISM? Where everything I'd believed to come through supernatural processes.

CoolUsername:


If causes only precede their effects inside space-time, then how can God, who exists outside space-time be its precursor?

Richard Dawkins used this as a basis for an uncaused universe but spacetime is inherent to the universe. God created the time spectrum so there could be cause and effect.

CoolUsername:


This 'god's' attributes are indistinguishable from natural processes and blind chance.

wrong, the laws that govern the universe tend to complement each other, taking earth as a case study, the size of the earth as well as its corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly oxygen and nitrogen only extending about 50miles above the earth's surface, if earth were smaller an atmosphere will be impossible, and if it were larger, it's atmosphere will contain free hydrogen just like in Jupiter. Before you term it "blind chance" consider these..........

How could an impersonal physical entity come up with something that depicts such striking precision?

why does the universe operate by uniform laws of Nature?

why is gravity consistent?

From your definition of how the universe came in to being, it is easy to imagine a universe where conditions change unpredictably from instant to instant, where things pop in and out of existence, However that isn't the case. There is no logical necessity for the universe to obey rules yet it does.

Trust me, the system of operation in the universe is the farthest thing from blind chance, it's all too planned out to be coincidental.

peacesamuel94:


wrong, the laws that govern the universe tend to complement each other, taking earth as a case study, the size of the earth as well as its corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly oxygen and nitrogen only extending about 50miles above the earth's surface, if earth were smaller an atmosphere will be impossible, and if it were larger, it's atmosphere will contain free hydrogen just like in Jupiter. Before you term it "blind chance" consider these..........

How could an impersonal physical entity come up with something that depicts such striking precision?

why does the universe operate by uniform laws of Nature?

why is gravity consistent?

From your definition of how the universe came in to being, it is easy to imagine a universe where conditions change unpredictably from instant to instant, where things pop in and out of existence, However that isn't the case. There is no logical necessity for the universe to obey rules yet it does.

Trust me, the system of operation in the universe is the farthest thing from blind chance, it's all too planned out to be coincidental.

You forgot to mention the trillions of others that don't possess such characteristics.

lordnicklaus:

Richard Dawkins used this as a basis for an uncaused universe but spacetime is inherent to the universe. God created the time spectrum so there could be cause and effect.

So now you're saying that cause and effect could have existed before time?

raphieMontella:

must you always be insane?
Does saying ''i dont know'' make him less of a naturalist?

---

some atheists do believe in the supernatural.

cry me a river....

wait oooo, some atheists believe in supernatural? and you still call them Atheists? there is much more confusion in una camp ooo


by the way, atheists have many definitions of atheism, but the whole world knows just one and I wonder why. so, what definition of atheism do you use to consider so called atheists with belief in supernatural as atheists.

wirinet:

You seemed pained that people reject your Jewish tribal god.

And the core of theism is what, SUPERNATURALISM? Where everything I'd believed to come through supernatural processes.

pained?? I am sorry bro, I am happy.

you know why? atheism has existed thousands of years before Christianity, yet it is still having 2-5% of the world up till today. or should I tell you the real world population of people who believe in my Jewish tribal God?

so why should I be pained? I am yet to Know.

yes, but when you hit us with arguments, we still maintain our position. unlike atheists who would run go hide under agnostic. now, figure out who is coward here.


breaking news!
hopefulLandlord has taken down the topic of the thread I debated him on many months ago. and do you know why? He is a coward. that's the way atheists roll.

promise10:

cry me a river....

wait oooo, some atheists believe in supernatural? and you still call them Atheists? there is much more confusion in una camp ooo


by the way, atheists have many definitions of atheism, but the whole world knows just one and I wonder why. so, what definition of atheism do you use to consider so called atheists with belief in supernatural as atheists.

atheism - /ˈeɪθɪɪz(ə)m/ noun 1. disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God
or gods.

Why make a thread when you're not willing to learn or actually take in some of the answers. With the way you're replying op im not sure you've understood some of the "atheist" replies already given.

As someone already pointed out we have no clue how many failed attempts there were before us. They weren't when the said there is a lot to go over. Note im not a physicist butanyway..

You wanted proof of nebular hypothesis and the formation of a spiraling accretion disk? One proof is that all planets rotate. According to some law of motion which I can't recall an object will continue to move in the same direction with the same velocity unless acted upon by another force. Its likely that the rotation of planets is a result of the conservation of angular momentum of the accretion disk they were formed from, unless a force acts in the direction opposite to this rotation planets should theoretically continue to spin.

You went back to asking why they're laws that govern the universe and someone accurately pointed out that laws describe and attempt to explain observable phenoma.

Also the idea of complexity pointing to a creator is false. Just because it appears complex does not necessarily mean it is truly complex. Likewise because it works does not necessarily mean it's perfect.

I can try and answer your questions but only if you're legitimately attempting to understand the answers otherwise this will just be another atheist/theist bashing roundabout thread.

Finally I just want to say it's a fact that humans using science haven't found everything or understood everything, laws/theories/hypotheses change subject to evidence and they're a lot if blank spaces. But the blank space doesn't necessarily mean a creator.

promise10:


pained?? I am sorry bro, I am happy.

you know why? atheism has existed thousands of years before Christianity, yet it is still having 2-5% of the world up till today. or should I tell you the real world population of people who believe in my Jewish tribal God?

so why should I be pained? I am yet to Know.

yes, but when you hit us with arguments, we still maintain our position. unlike atheists who would run go hide under agnostic. now, figure out who is coward here.


breaking news!
hopefulLandlord has taken down the topic of the thread I debated him on many months ago. and do you know why? He is a coward. that's the way atheists roll.

Atheism actually started in the hellenistic period, when Greek intellectuals started questioning the existence of the Greek gods. Prior to that almost every culture believed gods were responsible for all natural phenomena, so much so that every natural phenomena and celestial objects were attributed to different gods.

For the fact that close to 5% of the world population today are atheists seems extraordinary. People are becoming atheist without any threats, persuations or evangelism. Most of the people turning to atheists were previously theist who on their own discovered the deceit and lies of theism.

You seem to be hiding under the security of numbers. The fact that about 30% of the world population believes in your Jewish tribal god does not mean jack. The Jewish tribal god is a very violent god, and its adherents had been spreading its beliefs through threats, violence and intimidation for over 2000 years. Its rival Arabic tribal god (Islam), which started about 600 years later and also using the same methods of violence and intimidation has gathered up to 1.6 billion adherrents (22%) of the real world population.

DoctorAlien:


I don't know why you think you're the only one who has a knowledge of science. Anyway, the delusion is common to "atheists".

For the fact that the universe did not create itself, Something created it.

Good night.

Now that you know for FACT, that SOMETHING created the universe, can you now tell me the SOMETHING please?