₦airaland Forum

shadeyinka:
Sorry for late reply. The religion Bots of Nairaland banned me for no apparent reason. Guess what? Over this same thread.

I created a post just to highlight this but Seun removed it! So, I still don't know why I was banned. Check out what I posted after this post.

OK.

So sorry about that...

shadeyinka:
But its not a theory. It is an experience and experience may not be physically provable. If an Angel walked into my room and spoke to me for 30 minutes about issues, the only way I can prove it is to bring the angel to the public for all to see. However, things don't work like that. An angel decides when to be seen or not and he can't be controlled.

Now, Is the experience true? YES
Is is physically provable? NO
Since it is not Physically provable, it that the final conclusion that the experience is false? NO!

This brings two scenarios in mind;

1. Your experience was real but only in your head, maybe hallucinating, or dreaming. Either ways no way to prove it.

2. Your experience was actually real, and angels do infact exists and they live outside the physical realm in which case you still can't prove physical.

So in both ways, science would not be able to affirm your claim because it deals with repeatable and testable facts. Then you really cant blame the scientific community for not accepting such things if thats the case.

LOL. You know that is not True. Theists don't shut down at making inquiry about nature. Am I not a scientist like you? Theists study of Science, Science displays the wisdom of God in design and making of matter. The difference with atheists see probabilistic "accident" as the cause while theists see "God" as the source.

Both positions physically scientifically speaking is impossible.

Not all theists though but majority...

Impossible is a strong word, i doubt they are impossible(even God being the source), i just feel its is far more plausible for the universe to be random and follow natural laws than for it to be designed by a super intelligent designer.

Theists are certain "God" made all things
Atheists are certain "probabilistic chance" made all things.
Both positions are equally scientifically fantastic. None of the positions claim infinite knowledge. Both push the limit of their understanding to God for the Theists and Scienctific Progress for Atheists.

Atheists are not certain of anything and that is why they demand evidence.

Right now, i am an atheist grounded in science, but some atheists are not science people at all and dont even accept evolution or even know what the big bang theory is, they just know logically that supernatural claims need evidence.

That doesn't mean that every ancient idea is flawed or false.

Not every idea but most of them and those who got it right were just lucky enough to stumble on the right answer and not because they actually worked it out to the solution.

What history is teaching us is that the easiest answers to us isnt necessarily the right one. The universe doesnt care if it is simple enough for humans to comprehend.

Eddlad:
Rain and wind patterns grow plants then animals feed on them then I feed on animals, whereis the society in this?
Remember human interaction isnt a prerequisite for sustainance.
You probably don't even understand what I said.

Lol...Arrogance would get you nowhere...you think you are sooooo intelligent that the little thing you say is beyond everyone's comprehension, smh.

Anyways, i would love to see you survive in the wild without any human interaction for the rest of your life. You understanding the patterns of the seasons where as a result of your interactions with humans and books, No one man would have come up with the idea on his own, Infact our civilization is built on the foundation of past knowledge and knowledge is a product of a shared community, no man is an island of knowledge.

So if you think you can survive in the wild, without an human interaction, please be my guest.

Vick4rill:
guy refute my claims and stop all this childish pranks.i dnt find funny abeg.

why the hell would i refute your claims, i just see your post as someone pained by something and just ranting...if you dont want to marry an atheist, na your business, why come here and start telling others what to do and what not to do?, If two people love themselves and are determined to make it work even with different idealogies, do you really think its your post that would stop them?

Moses, and the Exodus of Isreal(especially the red sea part)

Eddlad:
My feelings are not hinged on anyone else's, why should do anything having the interest of the society at the back of my mind, why can't I have it all, everyone else can die as far as am concerned.

Why this morality code, it feels subtly based on something else than raw logic.

The answer is simple, you need the society to survive...if all human society casts you out to the wild where you can do whatever you want, how long do you think you would survive?...

We all need the society to survive and the society need all of us to be moral for it to survive.

Vick4rill:
and wat is special about atheist that will make her leave me for them?

I think the question you should be asking yourself is "what i did to make her leave me?" and stop blaming people who have different idealogies from you...i.e if she really left you...lol

Vick4rill:
unless you are ready to be an atheist your self, dont ever believe you guys will be able to tolerate each other for long .forget about the "bulshit" about: both of you, loving yourselves and been tolerance to one another. that assertion can never work. how can u spend your life with somebody who thinks that your "belief" is delussional and plain foolishness?.how can you train your children in such a man house? what if he decides that his children will become an Atheist too? what will happend when both of you are supposed to pray and come together as a family? do you think such a person will tolerate ur pastors or church members visiting you in his house?.avoid Atheist like plagues.dont ever think you can change or convert him, once you people are married. there is no any good quality that any atheist possesed, that is not found among the christian brothers.just pray hard and God will give you a good believer that will give u more happiness than any atheist can ever thinks of giving you.

Lol, seems like your gf left you for an atheist...

shadeyinka:
The bottom line is still why be an Agnostic Atheist rather than Agnostic Theist? In both cases, there is the notion of "I don't know". Even though either of the 2 positions is not "christianly".

I am an Agnostic Atheist because the default position is Atheism, Theism is the special and incredible case or claim which if true, would be very extraordinary and amazing.

Of course, we are not likely alone in the universe statistically speaking.
Life shouldn't be possible with Carbon-Nitrogen complex if we look strictly at non creation possibilities.

On this second issue is, can their exist " atoms" not made up from our normal proton- neutron- electron basic building blocks...This too is a possibility that may be finite.

I guess the problem had always been, how dare theists without a scientificly elucidated theory arrive at a possibility that is statistically feasible.

Theists producing theories is not a sin, infact a belgium priest was the originator of the big-bang theory. This goes for everyone both theist and atheist alike, if you bring forth a very incredible claim, you should have an incredible evidence to back it up if not no-one would take you seriously.

My import was not to make a 1:1 comparison of classical: quantum phenomenon but to show that limitation of the classical laws got scientists to think out of the box. Just as limitations of the physical laws should prompt a higher critical thinking for the existence of non physical laws. I guess theists jumped the gun by naming it spiritual.

yes, the facts made them to change their thinking but note,"The Facts". If we were also presented with facts of demons and ghosts, i am sure the scientific community might change their thinking also but no such facts has been presented.

Faith isn't about probability! Faith is an intrinsic unexplainable knowing! Faith is like Love (maybe that's why they say love is blind).

I doubt if there will ever be a physical explanation for instinct. To me, it is a kind of programming by one who preemptively put in reactions that will guarantee the survival of life. It is easier to believe that this is a design than a product of chance.

The first bolded sentence is the reason science dreads religion, it shuts you off from inquiry and pre-supposes the answers even though those answers are not sufficient. What if you are wrong, and in the near-future we do find an explanation for it, what would you do then?, would you push design backwards to things you dont understand then?

I did mention earlier that theist claim infinite knowledge but you tried to turn the argument around, but please be sincere,doesn't the idea that you know that there is a God and he made all things sounds like infinite knowledge to you?

The second bolded sentence rests on the fact of easy thinking; It was easier for ancient humans to believe that the sun revolved around the earth and so they did, it was easier for them to think that the gods were the causes of thunder and lightning and they did, it was easier for them to believe that diseases were caused by demons and so they did.

In modern times, it is easier to believe that someone designed everything and so many of us do, without thinking critically and using past human mistakes as a lesson guide.

shadeyinka:
LOL. You know, this is always my confusion with Agnostic Atheists. They argue and speak like Gnostic Atheists then suddenly they rember that they are supposed to be " sitting on the fence" and suddenly change course.

Of course your believe is that EVERYTHING has natural explanations including the seemingly elusive ones with the claim that over time, knowledge and Science will unravel such mysteries.

I think Theists are more balance in this respect. We do not say that ALL unexplained events are spiritual, but we acknowledge that there are some things the Physical laws cannot explain.

I would speak for myself in this scenario, i don't believe i am sitting on the fence because i say "i don't know", No, i believe what i am doing is giving a room for skepticism even with my beliefs(which by the way most theists bluntly refuse to do).

Let me clarify, Given the Large Number of planets and stars out there and given the abundant nature of the ingredients of life, it is really absurd to claim that life only exists here on earth, but i would not out-rightly call that claim wrong or impossible, because we don't have enough evidence for it(even though we would later in the future).

So my stance on alien life is that it is very very very unlikely that we are alone in the universe but i might be wrong since i don't have enough evidence yet to be sure.

So likewise this, it is very very very unlikely that many "yet to be understood" claims are the workings of the supernatural but i might be wrong since i don't have enough evidence to be sure also.

shadeyinka:
I agree...but the converse too is true. The fact that something's are not understood by science is an evidence that science or the physical laws may not be able to explain everything. The failure of classical Physics led to the quantum physics.

The failure of classical Physics led to the standard model of quantum physics yes, but the standard model is still "Nature", it just was not familiar to us, but it is very much Natural and any other Natural laws. No supernatural explanations was invoked for it.

shadeyinka:
From all the knowledge we have, some things still do not add up. There is no physical explanation for instinct for instance....evolution cannot explain it. To the theists, it is an evidence for a designer who put "the booting sequence" as part of the OS of living beings.

Like in quantum physics, nothing is exact!
Being sure (aside Faith) needs objective reproducable evidences. The spiritual doesn't operate in such fashion.

Faith is Just like Love: it doesn't have physical quantifying elements.

There is no physical explanation for instinct yet, and moreover there are reasons to believe it might not be as complicated as it sounds given the structure of neurons, synapse and the overall connections of the brain but that is a story for another time.

Having Faith is awesome, when you know there is a probability of it happening, but faith without any probability whatsoever is pretty much "wishful thinking" in my honest opinion.

shadeyinka:
How can I make such a grandiose claim! However, I think it is you who makes such a claim..that natural laws can explain EVERYTHING. You know that nature can do everthing and can explain everything! I nearly claim that nature can't explain everything.

Lol, I doubt being skeptical can be regarded as having infinite knowledge. I dont know the full length of Natural laws and when something is out of the ordinary, i dont claim it to be Natural neither do i claim it is Supernatural.

"I don't know" would be the term but i am very weary of terming it Supernatural due to the fact that previously, many events that we ddnt understand and termed supernatural were found to have Naturalistic explanations, so out of inference, i resist the temptation to call things i dont understand "Supernatural".

shadeyinka:
Of course, there are so many things. Example
A. Instinct in Animals:
How does a chicken know it should brood on her eggs?
How does a baby know it should suck
Mating behaviours in animals
Foraging in insects
Social segregation and duties of bees
Birds building nests
Sexual behaviours among birds etc

B. Intuition:
Intuition is the ability to acquire knowledge without proof, evidence, or conscious reasoning, or without understanding how the knowledge was acquired.

Just because some things are not fully understood, doesnt make them evidence for the supernatural, i am sure you would agree!

shadeyinka:
Everyone is constrained by the laws of nature. If I were on the moon, I would be able to jump higher than 8feet off the ground. If I eat only fruits and berries, I might live to be 130 years old. If cells do not age..I would be stronger at 99 than a young man of 20.

So many things constrain our lives. Even, Demons constrain some peoples lives through limitating their natural capacities..

Ok, so if we are all constrained by the laws of nature, how can we be sure that we can infer what is supernatural or not?

shadeyinka:
Not everything has a natural explanation.

1. If you make such a claim, then you automatically claim that you have infinite knowledge of Naturalistic laws and thus can know what nature can do and what it cant do.

2. Do you have any evidence to back up that claim?

3. How can you be sure if you yourself is constrained by the laws of Nature?

Interesting thread...

I did try to watch the videos, but i am in holdup right now and i cant hear well enough, but i would give a few personal opinions on the matter.

My atheism is based on one single premise, and its not science or hypocrisy of religion, or hate of God, or a tragedy. No, none of that, it is based on one simple fact:-

- There has been no single evidence for all supernatural claims.

Infact in anicent times, the supernatural was a term used by we humans to describe phenomenon that we ddnt understand, but has we grew wiser and more scientific, the realm of supernatural things grew smaller and smaller.

Today, we still hear of ghosts, and demon possession but no single concrete evidence as sufficed for even one.

I do not doubt the intentions of some of those in deliverance, many are dubious but some are really sincere and truly believe that they have been possessed by the devil or by demons, and when the brain believes something that strongly, it becomes hard to not see otherwise. I do remember telling you about my mom being a deliverance minister shadeyinka, and she believes it so firmly, she really believes in demons and spirits and believes she has casted those things out of alot folks. So I understand perfectly.

But believing something because its convenient or because it has been constantly repeated to you is a very wrong reason to believe and so i require evidence for any belief to take place.

So as i man who doesn't believe in the supernatural, i first look for Naturalistic explanation to events i feel are absurd and out of the ordinary and even if i cant find one, it still doesn't mean its supernatural, it just means there is a Natural cause in which we are not familiar with.

malvisguy212:
The bible was not written for scientific purpose, prophecy was not meant for prophet to understand, they were only instructed to write what they see.

God don't invent religion. Man invent religion. God created man for father and son relationship, after the fall of man, everything was lost, that is were religion come in.

Giving an excuse for the bible or for God doesnt prove his existence you know...

gaelllic:
You. A mere bag of blood and saliva, sandwiched between two halves of Eternity, who does not know from whence he came nor where he

goes, presume to arrogate to yourself the power to dictate what is Good and what is Evil? You are not well.




Yes. It precisely and automatically does.




A lover of sodomy and the murder of babes.

See.

See the slimy thoughts that slither about in the dank cavern this creature calls its mind.



You do. And you are.

k

lordnicklaus:
No, but I do believe in a resurrection.

Alright, but you agree that no tangible evidence exists for an intelligent creator, correct?

branhampaul:
1. Ofcourse It Is.
2. Were Does The Bible Say Star Will Fall On The Earth.
3. God Created The Universe So He Can Do Anything... Beside, The Earth Is God's Footstool.
.
Answer My Questions;
1. Why Do Miracles Happen When Pastors Pray?
2. Why Is It That Humans Have Conscience But Animals Don't
3. Who Made The Sun?
4. How Come About Spirits?
Just Answer Those First..

You post stated ask your questions not come and be asked questions...

lordnicklaus:
I do not adhere to the abhorrent doctrine of a place of eternal fiery torment. God hasn't created any new humans. He only created Adam and Eve but He gave them the ability to reproduce.

Ok, i assumed...

Do you believe in an imortal soul of man?

lordnicklaus:
Every religion has the perception of an all powerful creator but there are some which feel that forces He created should be revered alongside Him and this is where polythesm comes in.

But why doesnt God reveal himself in an unambiguous way to every human being telling them that he and only he alone should be worshipped?

Why does he allow the confusion to ensue?

What is the point of being on earth?, why cant we all just be in heaven and when someone defaults, he serves his time in hell?, why the process of mortal life?

Where was our souls before we were born and when did it enter our bodies?

lordnicklaus:
The earth being 6,000 years old was due to the meticulous calculations of ages and generational time frames by archbishop Asher but a logical explanation to this is that we are not the first on the earth. I draw my premise from retranslating Genesis from the original Hebrew. During retranslation I had this:
"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth became formless and desolate"

The Hebrew word rendered as "was" can also be translated as "became". So, we are probably not the first on earth and that the earth is 6,000 years old only came from the calculation based on our own time frame and not that of the pre-existent time frame.

In a literal sense, it would refer to a meteor shower but metaphorically, stars are used to refer to saints and falling from heaven to earth means backsliding.


Ps: It was Joshua and I believe the earth just stopped rotating but Joshua being primitive thought the sun stood still.

malvisguy212:
1. Verse were the bible say the earth is 6000years old.
2.Revelation 6:13-14 is talking about an Event YET to come,and as such cannot be proven or disprove by science. To say the book describe something that is impossible, is to say the event has happen. Secondly, the bible make it clear, john don't understand what he was seeing, He was only instructed to write what he see. Thirdly. The Greek word, astayr, besides being translated "star" can also have the meaning "comet," "meteor" or "asteroid", since there is no Greek word having this meaning. Even our English language refers to meteorites as "falling stars." The description of the "star" Wormwood seems to be that of a large meteorite or comet
3. The text makes it clear that Sun "stopped in the middle of the sky".We still use phrases like the "Sun rose", "Sun set". There is no English (or Hebrew) phrase indicating that the earth rotates until the horizon covers the Sun. It was a supernatural event.

You are right, it was joshua, so sorry...

Well, my main point is that the bible was not clear, when science negates some stuffs in the bible, intellectuals try to change the meaning to a metaphorical meaning, it has been happening since the time science became fastheld.

So it shows that the bible writers werent sure about these things or got the answers wrong, either ways, its really not a great proof for an intelligent creator in my humble opinion.

Then let me ask this question, why is God vague?, why are there many religions and not one?

Normally, i dont reply threads like this but your confidence in the proof of God(jesus) as you called it is amusing, So i would ask you a couple of questions...

1. Why does the bible say the earth is 6000years old when it is clearly not?

2. Why does the bible say stars would far on the earth when the fact is its the earth that would fall in a star?

3. Why did gideon command the sun to stand still when it was the earth that was rotating?

Baby steps...

mank1234:
Firstly, I don't need to know you to disagree with you on social media if you publicly state your view and show disdain too others view with respect to mattersmnof religion.

So stating a view thats different from yours is now disdain for your view and religion...smh, xtians always playing the victims when they are challenged...

Secondly, my statement centered on general relativity and not special relativity. Consequently, I'll disregard your second paragraph for straying off the point I raised.

Does our instrument of measuring time, actually show different time at differing distance from the earth's core? Is time a function of gravity. Yes, you alluded to this. Closer to the core it is slower, away from it it is faster. What will be the effect if the gravity was so great as it is in black hole? Will it be at standstill? Are you aware that even light is unable to escape the gravitational pull of the black hole?

Yes time is relative. A day on earth is not same as in Pluto. A year on earth is not same as in Pluto. Eternity is culmination of passage of time. If this is so, then eternity on earth cannot be same as eternity on Pluto and cannot be same everywhere else in the universe.

Dude, Special relativity is the relative nature of Distance and Time in different reference points, General relativity is talking about Gravity.

Please know the difference before coming to talk about it...

Then you dont even understand how this time relativity works, what do you mean by time stands still, i just explained to you, from a distant reference point, the person close to a black hole clock would appear to slow down but to the person on the black hole, he wud be killed in a matter of seconds and would experience time the same way we experience time.

Look, its obvious you just heard about relativity and want to feel intelligent and coming to blow grammar but sincerely, dont do that with me, i know Special relativity and general relativity like the back of my hand.

So i can specifically tell you that what is said about time being different on pluto is "BULLSCRAP".

Go and learn about it before coming to argue, and if you still want to argue, i wont answer you...

NB: where and when does infinity feels shorter than infinity?, are you listening to yourself?, do you know what infinity is? Even if you are correct(which you are not), Eternity on pluto would still be eternity because it is life without END, jeez, where is your logic?

gaelllic:
Why should He?

Them that killed Christ, why did they not just poison Him?

Why the grievous torture?

Do you know that all sinners are complicit in this torture?

Do you know that, for punishment to fit crime, the sufferer must be made truly sorry for what he has done?
(Not stubbornly insisting, 'Just wait till I'm out...!' like many career criminals do?)

Judgement must, at some stage, be Final.

As per 'humane'...

Do you know who Jimmy Saville was?

Do you think that merely 'undoing his existence' would be adequate punishment for him?

Why jail a rapist for decades? Pain, danger, loneliness, idleness, regret for what might have been...

Why not just give him a sound beating and 'be done with it'?


Evil men think not on
judgment: but they that seek after the Lord, take notice of all things

Proverbs 28:5

May I ask what kind of life you live? Broadly?

There is a level of clarity that will avoid you as long as sin rules in your life.

Indeed, it is often secret attachment to such sins that spur this obstinate disbelief, this fervent and fruitless wish that the doer

will 'one day get away with it'.

First of all, I said it before and would say it again, Noone who commited a crime in a finite amount of time deserves a punishment that would last for eternity. The idea is primitive and barbaric.

Secondly, So because i call out the barbaric nature of the punishment of hell automatically means i am a sinner and i want to continue in my sinful ways...lol

Well i guess since i stand for gay rights and dignity, i also want to be a gay, and since i am pro-choice, i guess my gf is pregnant and i want to do abortion.

I dont need to be a bad person to realize that the punishment for being bad is inhumane and barbaric.

sinequanon:
I've cut out your essay, as it is irrelevant.

All your post boils down to is "like, seriously..."

Now try to act rationally, and cut to the chase. Quote the part in your link which says that the existence of the Higgs Boson has been scientifically proven.

I'm telling you right now, it doesn't say or imply that, and, if you think that it does, it means you cannot read anywhere near critically enough to understand or be debating about science.

k

gaelllic:
Alright, man.

Look at it another way.

Every soul will exist eternally. Death is separation, not cessation.

Given this, any finite period of suffering must ultimately pass away.

Any finite period of suffering is insignificant with regard to Eternity. Even if it were a million million etc. years, relative to 'infinite time' its worth

would be less than that of a second's relative to your mortal life.

Thus, any finite suffering, is equivalent to an infinitesimal span of one's eternal existence. It would be like (in mortal terms) condemning a vile

murderer to an instant of pain (a quick jab with an empty needle, say).

Our eternal existence renders any finite punishment less than a mere slap on the wrist.

Besides, suppose the exonerated damned were to rebel again? What then? Endless cycles of finite pain and repentance ad infinitum?

So the unjust can then challenge Infinite Majesty without any real fear of real regret?

God's Justice must be Eternal and Final. QED.



Your local chairman probably doesn't notice you.

You wouldn't notice a sentient bacterium.

But He notices you. And your best act of gratitude is to challenge him.

So instead of total destruction and be done with it, it is more humane to punish for all of eternity?

I thought God was all powerful?, why cant he just destroy the soul and be done with it?

When you think about it, God himself represents the ultimate dream of mankind; He's immortal, he knows everything there is to know, he is alpowerful, and completely independent of reality itself. Are these not all the things we wish for?

Average human lifespan is around 75 years. During this time we have our own struggles, hardships, and problems. If we could live forever, all our problems would become insignificant due to having an eternity to solve them. Or better yet, if we could have almighty power, we could solve any problem instantly. But even without these things, if we only knew the solutions of any problem that falls on us, that would be all we need, right?

What is the one thing promised to us in most holy books? Paradise, Eden, Heaven. A place of our choosing where we are eternally young, and where we have all we need. Forever. All we could hope for and all that we ever wanted, in that one place. Why is this repeated, over and over again in so many religions? Because these thing are solutions to our problems. Escapes from problems. Wishful thinking. God himself manifests Himself as the apex, the absolute peak of our desires, a being so wise and powerful none come close. Why? Because we want to be like that.

It is exactly in these wishes that our nature comes to sight. We want power to compensate for our weaknesses, we want knowledge to compensate for insecurities, for regret of missed chances, to stop the feeling of helplessness, and to become what we always wanted to be. A person loved by all, successful in every way, without equal and at the top all. These primitive desires are the reason we can believe that all these things are possible, when they are absolutely not. Regardless of our call in life we can't be loved by all and there will always be people who are more successful in some fields.

Though God appears as a dominant father figure, it is exactly because he is the manifestation of desires of man that he can't be real. Reality and logic itself reject the existence of God. Immortal, all-powerful, all-knowing being cannot exist without contradicting itself on every step of it's way. As there were thousands of tribes, nations, countries and empires, there existed with them thousands of deities, Gods, saviors and holy protectors. Taking countless forms and shapes, but all with one goal, to be a model of perfection. To be something to strive for. Without man, there is no God, but without God, there exists a man. A true man, free of religious dogmas and social stigmas, open minded and striving for a true desire of man - humanity. Because being a good person has nothing to do with religion, only with yourself. Accepting yourself for who you are, and striving to better yourself, all while respecting others and helping when you can is Real Heaven. That is the true Paradise we can create, without God, with our own two hands. The final and truest wish of reason and humanity, celebrating it's victory over the primitive and basic desires we have. That is the battle of good vs evil, God vs Satan, it's all us, in ourselves and our struggle to be...a human.

sinequanon:
Instead of "wowing", produce a scientific paper or quote from a scientist that says that the existence of the Higgs Boson has been proven.

Being "educated" means being able to read carefully and critically.



Try using your critical faculties instead of your emotion. I have already answered this question in my previous post.

Ignorance is not a virtue dude.

For thousands of years, man believed that the earth was flat and the sun and moon revolved around it, that reasonable because we see the sun and the moon move in the sky but the earth is always stationary, they also believed diseases, plagues, Natural disasters were done by gods.

Thales of miletus was the first scientist in recorded history because he used observations and deductions to try and explain what happens in the Natural world, he lived 500BC but he had such amazing insight and his methods were agreeable but it wont be a very useful tool for another 2000years until Copernicus resurrected it.

Copernicus lived in a time where gods did everything but he revolutionized the world with experiments and deductions to explain truths previously unknown, like the earth revolved around the sun instead of the other way around.

Kepler, Galileo, Huygens, Newton are all extraordinary men who built on this scientific enterprise and showed us more truths about the world that we would have never guessed in a million years.

When Europe discovered that science was the best route to knowledge and truths, they made it prestigious and their culture grew at an alarming rate.

All cultures that accepted the scientific process has grown to tremendous sizes and become far more knowledgeable than people 2500years ago.

Science is not about some people ganging up to deceive the masses, on the contrary, science is built to check itself, you are not regarded serious until you have documented the process and experiments that lead you to your conclusion and it must be repeatable and should explain all facts seen in Nature.

That is the scientific method and it is the best means to truth that we humans have ever invented.

As to the Nobel prize winning discovery, you think they lied about it? Dude, you sound like a crazy conspiracy theorists!, like seriously...

https://home.cern/topics/higgs-boson

sinequanon:
Science, itself, isn't about truth. It is about a certain kind of "consistency" and "predictability".

Scientific findings are not "true", they are "currently accepted in the field". Science evolves.

And, in general, scientists are no more honest than anybody else. Because something is "scientifically accepted" does not mean it is true.

The worst recent case of deception in the scientific community is the supposed confirmation of the Higgs Boson.

You will recall that, during the theatrical debacle, designed to justify investment in enhancing the Large Hadron Collider, Stephen Hawking actually pretended that he had lost his bet that the the Higgs Boson did not exsist, and Peter Higgs was awarded the Nobel Prize!!

Wow, is an educated person typing this?, this is amazing...

so are you telling me that the discovery of the Higgs boson is fake?

This is the reason why Africans dont do science, they dont innovate, they dont ponder on questions that amazes the mind!. How can someone be typing what you just typed? are you kidding me?.

If Science is not about truth, then what in hell is it about?

DoctorAlien:
donffd,

Now let's be honest: which makes more sense to you? That a frog suddenly turned into a snake or that an intelligent Creator designed both creatures? GOD created, and I would tell you from the top of my head.

Don't tell me fishes turned into amphibians and amphibians turned into reptiles and all that, and then conclude by telling me "it makes sense." It makes absolutely no sense.

In trying to prove evolution, scientists have come up with many "most-similars" to humans. When it comes to DNA, banana is the most similar to man. When it comes to another criterion, another thing becomes the most similar to man. Aren't they confused?

"Scientists" have to keep publishing new lies, you know, so that faith in their senseless religion called "Evolution" won't die.

You can as well educate yourself on that link I gave to your colleague, Seun.

Dude, you havent actually read anything about Evolution by Natural selection, because if you have, you would not sprout such things like "a frog suddenly turned into a snake" and the painful part of it is that you dont want to learn about it because you have already made up your mind.

So i guess more grace to your elbows, but i do advice you, when you are in an intellectual gathering, don't say what you just said, because 99% of the people there would just laugh at you.

DoctorAlien:
"The same intelligent scientists whose theories are responsible for all the comforts we enjoy in the modern world, have told us..." -Argumentum ad verecundiam. This is a fallacy.

Actually, scientists have come to agree that Natural Selection cannot be the driving force behind evolution. This is because the driving force behind Natural Selection has to be mutation, and all known (albeit very rare) cases of mutation have proved fatal and destructive to the mutant individual. Thus, mutation brings extermination instead of development in species.

Maybe y'all atheists need to read more and think with your head and for yourselves, and stop committing the fallacy of appeal to authority/accomplishment.

Your understanding of Mutation is still elementary, and any attempt to educate you would be a total waste of time but i would say somethings:

First, i cannot speak for all atheists but i am certain unlike you that never questions your belief, i question mine everytime and use my head to deduce what really is true or not

Evolution and the Bible, which makes more sense, I say Evolution and i would tell you from the top of my head.

Why does evolution say Pisces evolved to amphibians and amphibians evolved to reptiles and birds , and reptiles evolved to mammals, and if you look at the real world, it makes sense?

Pisces live in the water and lay eggs
Amphibians live in water and land and lay eggs
Reptiles live on land and lay eggs
Birds in the sky and on trees and lay eggs
Mammals on land and give birth to live young ones

Why does the similarities of the body plan of these animals match up with what Evolution says?

Why does the DNA of closely related animals are far more identical than other animals?

Why is it that the DNA that resembles mostly the human DNA is not a hyena, or a bat or a chicken but a chimpanzee, the same animal that i asked my mom as a child why it resembles us so well!


Only a close-minded person would see the evidence of Evolution all around us and deny it because of preconceived ideologies.

mank1234:
Leave the young man. A thousand year is like a day in God's eye. Eternity looks long to us but not to the creator. Scientist whom donnffd has so much faith have since come up with the notion that time is relative. Time runs faster here on earth than it does at international space station (ISS) which is extremely very close to us compared to the expanse of the universe. It is believed by some scientists that at the 'black hole' time might be almost at a standstill. If indeed that's true, then his view of eternity being too long is flawed because he's only looking at it from the perspective of the earth.

More so, it seems donnffd would be a very good judge since he has super knowledge of the universe, and what is moral and fair. May be he should just make himself God!

God is awesome, fear him. Seek to know him and worship him alone.

First of all, i dont think you know me well enough to know what and who i have faith in.

Second, Time is relative, doesnt mean its different, I think your understanding of Special Relativity is very elementary.

Time runs at the same rate in every frame of reference(@ the speed of causality C, which consequentially is the speed of light), the magic begins to happen when you move at enormous speeds or in a vicinity of enormous gravity, your time seems to slow down relative to an outside observer, in the otherwords, if you were moving at 99.5% the speed of light, one minute would still be one minute for you, but for a stationary observer who is looking at your clock, that one minute would seem like 1year to him/her.

Now that in no way answers the problem of infinite time, no matter how time dilates, as long as you have an event that would never end, it is still regarded as Eternity. So your idea of "A thousand year is like a day in God's eye", and your limited understand of special relativity still doesn't shy away from an Eternity in Hell.

Like i said in an earlier post, just because you have infinite real numbers between 0 and 1 doesn't mean there are no infinite whole numbers!

gaelllic:
Your problem is that you have no good notion of the majesty of God.

Your problem is scale.

Your inability to comprehend eternal punishment reflects your failure to grasp infinite majesty, and the consequences of offense towards that.

Think well.

Think of all the suya (and other beef products) you've consumed all your life. Each meal, each bite was made possible by the death

of a creature which had no say in the matter. How many tears have you shed over them?

Every time you've used anti-insect aerosols, or even disinfectant, you have acted to take life you will never be able to create. Casually and

thoughtlessly. This is your right, men have dominion over animals.

But understand that the 'gap' in 'status' between you and the smallest bacterium is infinitely incomparable to the 'gap' between you

and God.

i.e. You could nurse a sick mosquito back to health, adopt it as a pet, feed it with your own blood, and still not have descended as low

as He does to have a relationship with you.

You are overestimating yourself in the grand scheme of things. And so you are unable to properly scale the gravity of sin,

and its just punishment.

I mentioned you in a post above so as to deal with this post as well.