₦airaland Forum

[quote author=splmosixx post=49111457][/quote]Must you insult God inorder to show your naivety

Maski87:
Yeah but oyibo prick dey small,anyway she go dey collect for side

You still believe that myth?

wizzakosh:
isn't it better than to marry a man that will face a firing squad @ then end. Maybe a year or two after marriage. IGBO GUY= DRUG = FIRING SQUAD.

its time to go and bath.

Darlingmua:
Awwwww beautiful couple .Beautiful biracial kids comes next, such a lucky lucky lady. Lucky guy too, our ladies are much more respectful and not nearly as half as deranged as them white Sissy's.

Are you sure? behind any successful man is a good woman. can we say that about Nigeria?. is our failure as a nation not as a result of unsuccessfull men and bad women behind them .

Stylediva:
Your funny! No pure white lady has a natural bigg butt BTW Kim k and Nikki Minaj aren't whites! And they all did enhancement surgeries!

You are a learner stop believing myths go use google. nikki is not white.

Uyi168:
Sadly,ibo guys d!ck too dy small.. babes can testify..

Na lie. ibo boys got Nuts that cannot fit in........

Lucasbalo:
You see the results of profiling that leads to the death of two black men in Charlotte and Tulsa. If those two guys are whites they would be alive. Look at Clive Bundy and his bunch grazing oon Federal land and their supporters are openly threatening Federal agents with automatics rifle. I dare any blacks or Latinos to do that without being shot to death. Then you see Uncle Toms house negroes supporting profiling. Not surprised though, because when the brain is in reverse, it doesn't work right. Profiling as we know is unconstitutional and the last I checked, this is a country founded on rule of law. America is not a jungle and for house negroes supporting profiling, it's like an antelope voting for a Lion. What a disgrace.

Get your facts right. this blacks were fighting with the police or pointed gun at them. no police officer will see a blackman and just shoot him. mind you police have killed more whites this year than blacks.

KingEtienneSky:
And THAT is what triggers "the impulse to condescend and belittle".....

This blueAgent fellow is a serious joke. The perfect clown for a circus show....and I'm not saying this is jest.

Another confused Fella.

ValentineMary:
I agree with Johnnydon22. Engaging u would be a total waste of time.

You are too Scared to engage me.

ValentineMary:
I agree with Johnnydon22. Engaging u would be a total waste of time.

You are too Scared to engage me.

Teempakguy:
Including the fact that humans are made from water?

quran 21:30

the human body is more than 70%. There is also scientific speculation that life originated from either an organic soup or from hydro thermal vents. Which ever way you think of it, that verse is damn scientific. The bible claims humans were made from dust. It also claims that plants were created before the sun.

Anyway . . . before I over-rant. the bible is also partly copied text. The story of Noah, example, didn't originate from the bible.
Go ahead and make a case for "mere co-incidence"

I'm waiting.

How does this prove anything? Is the Bible a Science book? do you read about the origin of life in Economics Book?

Secondly Noah Story has no bases if not from the Bible. it has been distored by other religons for the purpose of confusing gulliable people like you.

Bandeco:
I have been seeing his[BlueAgent(m)] comments here. He is not just unlearned but also childish and uncivil in his submissions.

BlueAgent, This section is not meant for people like you. You can do a better job @ the relationship section.

I wonder why people in my generation still do cling on this god-believe when the lack of evidence therein is overwhelming even to a kid that is ready to embrace reason instead of dogma and beliefs.

Why do they even want god to exist?

You are a bigot .if you can not accept facts that are contrary to your Opnion.Since Science,logic,facts don't back your beliefs. i wonder what your argument is based on.

johnydon22:
Jesus Christ so you didnt know there are Hurricanes in other planet and even the one on Jupiter is greater and has lasted longer than any the earth has seen ...

Why would anybody waste time engaging you when you know so little but champion your ignorance with a lot of arrogance.

raphieMontella ValentineMary - this one is a waste of time, when he doesn't know basic things like this i don't see any need bothering.

Do you know what is a Hurricane? a tropical cyclone.

raphieMontella:
pls stop these lies...
Show me where intelligent design is an established scientific work..

Read what Scientists have to say.



www.geraldschroeder.com/ScienceGod.aspx

raphieMontella:
weird you aint aware tho ..okay oo..here www.nasa.gov/content/jupiters-great-red-spot-viewed-by-voyager-i
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Red_Spot

www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-36904456

https://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_413.html
all the facts you need

And how is a redspot Hurricance?
I must do Science. Science is in trouble.

donnffd:
You are right, the earth is perfect for life as we know, the only misconception here is overturned cause and effect.

You are assuming that the earth was created because of life, when it should be the other way around, Life evolved to fit the earth.

We both agree the earth is beautiful and its our home.

Dreamer.

DoctorAlien:
If I prove it my way, they start to talk again.

GOD is the Creator of and not a part of the universe, and so you cannot prove He exists by employing skeptical empiricism. Just like no amount of study you conduct on a building will prove that it's architect exists (assuming the identity of said architect is in question).

Look all around you, you will see proof of GOD's existence.

My problem with this Clowns, is that they don't mind not having evidence for Evolution or bigbang but demand evidence for God when it is everywhere for them to see.

DoctorAlien:


Yes. GOD is very complex. Too complex for our finite brains to comprehend.

However, this logic of yours will lead one into assuming there is an infinite number of Creators. If GOD is so complex that somebody must be His Creator, then that Creator is far more complex and so demands a Creator, and so on... Where does that lead us?

We also know that order cannot come out of chaos/disorder. Therefore there is a Creator.

nice point bro.

otemanuduno:
Plagia what? So you think I can take the Bible in my hands and plagiarise it without getting punished immediately, like thunder striking me down? That's so funny. This your god who sank a ship(TITANIC) and killed John Lennon for saying just a statement against him is so lame that he couldn't TOUCH OTEM who calls him a devil?

Anyway, ur god has no power over the truth. He is Satan and I will always call him his name, any day, anytime. Receive liberation in your brain in Atum's name. Amen

Another confused Bubba. get well soon.

ValentineMary:
Like seriously u gave zero evidence for ur claim and u still feel it is proper to push it on people did I say God does not exist I only said give me evidence. Which u failed to give and u want me to believe you Are u sure u are not blueagent ?


You speak just like blueagent @ bolded. How can u say that it shows u are inconsiderate and selfish. What of the 2 month old baby that died of AIDS in Uganda or the 3 year old killed by the tsunami what sin did they commit Religious fanatics like you are very insensitive and wicked. How can any sane human take u serious ?


Now this is laughable as well as senseless. It is so senseless that it does not deserve a reply.

You are Naive to understand and Discern God's plan and purpose.

ValentineMary:
All these theist are so dishonest See what I wrote here

U just picked a lie refusing to read the other arguments that perfectly counter ur argument. Am done with you bro.
And did u just say a prototype must not exist before fine tuning takes place
This is the definition you shared earlier

Pls try to be consistent in ur argument (if u have any).

As usual you Atheists keep re-phraseing same statement to decieve people.


Our main argument is how can we prove that the Earth originated by Chance.since Scientists express so much doubt about it. simple


Michael Turner, the
widely quoted astrophysicist at the University of Chicago and Fermilab, describes the fine-tuning of the universe with a simile: The precision is as if one could throw a dart across the entire
universe and hit a bulls eye one millimeter in
diameter on the other side. Roger Penrose, the
Rouse Ball Professor of Mathematics at the
University of Oxford, discovers that the likelihood
of the universe having usable energy (low
entropy) at the creation is even more astounding,
namely, an accuracy of one part out of ten to the power of ten to the power of 123. This is an extraordinary figure. One could not possibly even
write the number down in full, in our ordinary
denary (power of ten) notation: it would be one
followed by ten to the power of 123 successive
zeros! (That is a million billion billion billion
billion billion billion billion billion billion billion
billion billion billion zeros.) Penrose continues,
Even if we were to write a zero on each separate
proton and on each separate neutron in the entire universe -- and we could throw in all the other particles as well for good measure -- we should fall far short of writing down the figure needed.
The precision needed to set the universe on its
course is to be in no way inferior to all that
extraordinary precision that we have already
become accustomed to in the superb dynamical
equations (Newton's, Maxwell's, Einstein's) which govern the behavior of things from moment to
moment. Cosmologists debate whether the space-

donnffd:
When the earth was young, about 500 million years, it had an atmosphere mainly composed of hydrogen, the earths surface was bathed with ultraviolet rays from the sun. This environment would have been extremely hostile to life as we know it but what we found out, these ingredients were what was needed to spark the first living things.

Life stated in the ocean and grew rapidly, microbes were the only inhabiitants at the time. They were bottom of the ocean getting their energy from hydrothermal vents, and they flourished until some moved upward closer to the surface and evolved photosynthesis, they were able to use sunlight to create their own food and give oxygen as their waste product.

These organisms thrived for billions of years slowly pumping oxygen into the atmosphere, we owe how atmosphere to these amazing creatures.

The fact that animals evolved to depend on oxygen wasnt a surprise because if you didnt, you would not survive, thus we are here.

Many of the factors you mentioned can be explained naturally and doesnt need an extraordinary cause for it to happen.

Your Science SUCKS.


recognizing the objective truth of the
fine-tuning. The August '97 issue of "Science" (the
most prestigious peer- reviewed scientific journal
in the United States) featured an article entitled
"Science and God: A Warming Trend?" Here is an
excerpt: The fact that the universe exhibits many
features that foster organic life -- such as
precisely those physical constants that result in
planets and long-lived stars -- also has led some
scientists to speculate that some divine influence
may be present. In his best-selling book, "A Brief
History of Time", Stephen Hawking (perhaps the
world's most famous cosmologist) refers to the
phenomenon as "remarkable." The remarkable
fact is that the values of these numbers (i.e. the
constants of physics) seem to have been very
finely adjusted to make possible the development
of life". "For example," Hawking writes, "if the
electric charge of the electron had been only
slightly different, stars would have been unable to
burn hydrogen and helium, or else they would
not have exploded. It seems clear that there are
relatively few ranges of values for the numbers
(for the constants) that would allow for
development of any form of intelligent life. Most
sets of values would give rise to universes that,
although they might be very beautiful, would
contain no one able to wonder at that beauty.
Hawking then goes on to say that he can
appreciate taking this as possible evidence of "a divine purpose in Creation and the choice of the
laws of science (by God)" (ibid. p. 125). Dr.
Gerald Schroeder, author of "Genesis and the Big Bang" and "The Science of Life" was formerly with
the M.I.T. physics department. He adds the
following examples: Professor Steven Weinberg, a
Nobel laureate in high energy physics (a field of
science that deals with the very early universe),
writing in the journal "Scientific American",
reflects on: how surprising it is that the laws of
nature and the initial conditions of the universe
should allow for the existence of beings who
could observe it. Life as we know it would be
impossible if any one of several physical
quantities had slightly different values. Although
Weinberg is a self-described agnostic, he cannot
but be astounded by the extent of the fine-tuning.
He goes on to describe how a beryllium isotope
having the minuscule half life of
0.0000000000000001 seconds must find and
absorb a helium nucleus in that split of time
before decaying. This occurs only because of a
totally unexpected, exquisitely precise, energy
match between the two nuclei. If this did not
occur there would be none of the heavier
elements. No carbon, no nitrogen, no life. Our
universe would be composed of hydrogen and
helium. But this is not the end of Professor
Weinberg's wonder at our well-tuned universe. He continues: One constant does seem to require an incredible fine-tuning -- The existence of life of
any kind seems to require a cancellation between different contributions to the vacuum energy, accurate to about 120 decimal places. This
means that if the energies of the Big Bang were,in arbitrary units, not:
100000000000000000000000000000000000
000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000
000000000000000 000000000000000000, but
instead:
100000000000000000000000000000000000
000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000
000000000000000 000000000000000001,
there would be no life of any sort in the entire
universe because as Weinberg states: the
universe either would go through a complete
cycle of expansion and contraction before life
could arise, or would expand so rapidly that no galaxies or stars could form. Michael Turner, the widely quoted astrophysicist at the University of Chicago and Fermilab, describes the fine-tuning of the universe with a simile: The precision is as if one could throw a dart across the entire
universe and hit a bulls eye one millimeter in
diameter on the other side. Roger Penrose, the
Rouse Ball Professor of Mathematics at the
University of Oxford, discovers that the likelihood
of the universe having usable energy (low
entropy) at the creation is even more astounding,
namely, an accuracy of one part out of ten to the power of ten to the power of 123.

donnffd:
When the earth was young, about 500 million years, it had an atmosphere mainly composed of hydrogen, the earths surface was bathed with ultraviolet rays from the sun. This environment would have been extremely hostile to life as we know it but what we found out, these ingredients were what was needed to spark the first living things.

Life stated in the ocean and grew rapidly, microbes were the only inhabiitants at the time. They were bottom of the ocean getting their energy from hydrothermal vents, and they flourished until some moved upward closer to the surface and evolved photosynthesis, they were able to use sunlight to create their own food and give oxygen as their waste product.

These organisms thrived for billions of years slowly pumping oxygen into the atmosphere, we owe how atmosphere to these amazing creatures.

The fact that animals evolved to depend on oxygen wasnt a surprise because if you didnt, you would not survive, thus we are here.

Many of the factors you mentioned can be explained naturally and doesnt need an extraordinary cause for it to happen.

Too Naive to understand reality.

The Big Bang." At first, the universe was only
hydrogen and helium, which congealed into
stars. Subsequently, all the other elements were
manufactured inside the stars. The four most
abundant elements in the universe are: hydrogen,
helium, oxygen and carbon. When Sir Fred Hoyle
was researching how carbon came to be, in the
"blast-furnaces" of the stars, his calculations
indicated that it is very difficult to explain how
the stars generated the necessary quantity of
carbon upon which life on earth depends. Hoyle
found that there were numerous "fortunate" one-
time occurrences which seemed to indicate that
purposeful "adjustments" had been made in the
laws of physics and chemistry in order to
produce the necessary carbon. Hoyle sums up
his findings as follows: A common sense
interpretation of the facts suggests that a
superintendent has monkeyed with the physics,
as well as chemistry and biology, and that there
are no blind forces worth speaking about in
nature. I do not believe that any physicist who
examined the evidence could fail to draw the
inference that the laws of nuclear physics have
been deliberately designed with regard to the
consequences they produce within stars. Adds
Dr. David D. Deutch: If anyone claims not to be
surprised by the special features that the universe
has, he is hiding his head in the sand. These
special features ARE surprising and unlikely.
Universal Acceptance Of Fine Tuning Besides the BBC video, the scientific establishment's most
prestigious journals

Teempakguy:
Sorry if I seem like that. I actually like Christianity. I'm probably one of the most pro-christian Atheists here.

I was just trying to point out to him that his argument that bible predictions predate science means that the bible is correct is not necessarily true by pointing out that even the Koran can lay claim to similar argument.

If it makes you feel better, know I'd quote this thread to counter a Muslim who tries to use a similar argument.

You should have known that muslims copied most things from the Bible.

shadeyinka:
I quite agree with you that the factors raised about the earth and the origin of life may be explained naturally and of course that is not my aim. I am just focusing on the statistical odds of having ALL these factors in a single planet.

As close as the moon is, it is barren. Why? So many things missen in the equation especially the size which is not sufficient to trap an atmosphere through gravitation.

Without the Orbital inclination of the earth, we would not have our climatic seasons. The earths magnetic field is a saviour against the dangerous cosmic radiations that would have destroyed all probability of life's existence. The size of the earth is just the right size...imagine if humans live on Jupiter!

The presence of enough quantity of water in the sea, the water cycle supplying fresh water on land, Nitrogen cycle, Carbon cycle and Energy cycle all on just one planet? How come everything necessary for life on one planet?

Of course we can argue that we have billions of planets and so statistically it is possible. I agree, but there exist no guarantee that life will exist in a similar planet to ours in any other galaxy. Because, apart from the physical elements, we also have time as a variable. This make the odds almost impossible!

The earth has a molten inner core and it is in orbit of a stable star able to survive billions of years. To me, its about ALL the factors that simultaneously create an almost impossible statistical odds.

Usually for me, I dont attempt to prove the divine origin of life on earth by recent events. I go to the origin, just before the B bang when the laws of physics break down.

The Anthropic Principle admit to the "fine-
tuning" and conclude that the universe is "too
contrived" to be a chance event. In a BBC science
documentary, "The Anthropic Principle," some of
the greatest scientific minds of our day describe
the recent findings which compel this
conclusion. Dr. Dennis Scania, the distinguished
head of Cambridge University Observatories: If
you change a little bit the laws of nature, or you
change a little bit the constants of nature -- like
the charge on the electron -- then the way the
universe develops is so changed, it is very likely
that intelligent life would not have been able to
develop. Dr. David D. Deutsch, Institute of
Mathematics, Oxford University: If we nudge one
of these constants just a few percent in one
direction, stars burn out within a million years of
their formation, and there is no time for
evolution. If we nudge it a few percent in the
other direction, then no elements heavier than
helium form. No carbon, no life. Not even any
chemistry. No complexity at all. Dr. Paul Davies,
noted author and professor of theoretical physics
at Adelaide University: "The really amazing thing
is not that life on Earth is balanced on a knife-
edge, but that the entire universe is balanced on a
knife-edge, and would be total chaos if any of the
natural 'constants' were off even slightly. You
see," Davies adds, "even if you dismiss man as a
chance happening, the fact remains that the
universe seems unreasonably suited to the
existence of life .

donnffd:
You know i agree but let me throw in a thought experiment, please indulge me: Imagine microbes never evolved photosynthesis and never pumped oxygen, imagine we had just Nitrogen and hydrogen in our atmosphere, imagine the earth wasnt bombarded with asteroids carrying water but Ammonia, imagine the earth didnt have an ozone layer to protect it from UV rays from the sun and imagine Life started on the earth(given the age of the earth and how life was discovered, scientists suggest that life must have started quickly on earth).

Now what do we have, No ozone, ultraviolet rays everywhere, a sea of ammonia and no oxygen, Life would remain in the sea, and evolve, they would use Ammonia has their solvent and probably hydrothermal vents as their source of energy, some might evolve to use the UV light but lets be generous and say no animals crawled to land, they all evolved in their sea of ammonia.

Now imagine one species that evolved intelligence now claiming the earth was just right for their existence and the odds of it happening was astronomical.





The galaxy is about 10billion years old, so there has been plenty of time for planets to flourish life across it



If the features where different, like my thought experiment above, then we would not be here rather a different set of organisms adapted to those conditions



Yea, i agree alot of premise that comes from before the big bang is promising and captivating, and can be a real contender for an explanation for a divine creator but not the origin of the earth, it is well understood and no divine work seems to be at play.

Which bigbang? you are too Naive to comprehend REALITY.

otemanuduno:
Before I was a demon, according to you. Now it's about medication. Lol. U're just confusing yourself, just like yahweh your god, the author of confusion.
With all these, many people will start having a rethink about GOD ALMIGHTY whom they thought was yahweh. NIGERIANS WILL USE THEIR BRAINS AND DEVELOP UPSTAIRS.
anyway, I saw the hosts of yahweh in my dream today. I chased them away in the name of Otem, but I don't know yet if it is a mere dream or a SPIRITUAL DREAM. but all the same, THEY FLED

Another confused bubba.

lordnicklaus:
Earth is not the only planet which suffers the batterings of hurricane. Jupiter's red spot is a hurricane that has battered the planet for many years and hurricanes on earth do not match that on Jupiter, so would you say that sin brought such catastrophe to Jupiter? I am a theist btw, so do not quote me wrong....

Our arguement is not about Hurricane and Jupiter stop deviating. our argument is if their is proof of the World originating by chance or design. the same Scientist you hold in high esteem ,that told you about bigbang and evolution. have decleared that the probability of the earth originating by chance is mathematically impossible. so how do you explain your Earth origin, since Science is not supporting your cliam.j

Cowards the worst ,they could do was to ban me.

ValentineMary:
Lol @ bolded
Winner01 & Kingebukasblog see the type of theist u are breeding. smh

My joy is that, Science is against Athiests views.
if you have any facts better than the one provided by this Scientists you can share it with us.

I wonder what you Athiests believe in. since Scientists themselves doubt that the Universe could have an origin by chance.

ValentineMary:
And how did what I post derail from this definition pls point the part that was not in line with ur definition.

You said God had to follow set of laws. but fineturning in that article talks about God putting things in inorder to enable the Earth to be habitable.
it is not true that a prototype must exists before finetuning could be done.

raphieMontella:
sin brought hurricanes to jupiter?

Is there Hurricane in Jupiter? give us evidence and facts.