needanswer:
For those that believe God does not exist because he cannot be seen or measured, I have a question for you.

What fills about 70% of the entire universe?

The entire universe, includes our planet earth, our solar system, our milky way galaxy and all the billions of galaxies containing stars and SPACE.

The answer: DARK ENERGY.

It is so abundant in the universe, yet it cannot be seen, nobody knows what makes it up or what it possibly contains. Scientists can only guess at best, it cannot be measured directly itself, yet it is so abundant and we know absolutely nothing about it!

The part of the universe you can see and the part you can measure is about 5%, dark matter that you can't see makes up about 25% and what you can't see and can't measure makes up 70%, yet you believe that because something can't be SEEN or MEASURED like GOD, it is not REAL? Science says otherwise.

Meanwhile the most abundant thing in the universe DARK ENERGY cannot be SEEN or MEASURED, yet science believes in it because INDIRECTLY they know SPACE will not behave the way it is behaving unless there is an unseen force that FILLS it called DARK ENERGY.

So what do you have to say in your defense?

your even shooting yourself on the foot with this write up.

LordReed:


Wrong. The only people who believe that life began through evolution are the misinformed like you.

Oh, so you deny the fact that the Big Bang never occurred and that the evolution theory is wrong? Good. Let other atheists speak for themselves since nobody made you class monitor here.

Image123:

Quite interesting, kindly quote the verse.

"And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?" Genesis 3:1

Look closely at that statement and remember how relationships operate between persons.

DappaD:


Oh, so you deny the fact that the Big Bang never occurred and that the evolution theory is wrong? Good. Let other atheists speak for themselves since nobody made you class monitor here.

LoL! Says the guy who made a blatantly false blanket statement about atheists. BTW I didn't deny anything, I am pointing out your misinformation.

EMILO2STAY:
your even shooting yourself on the foot with this write up.

Don't give me a blank response, be specific.

needanswer:


Don't give me a blank response, be specific.

you should be talking about evidence of God from things that can be seen not things that cannot be seen. and again if got want to use planets and galaxies as an evidence for God, then you are speaking from the view point of atheism because this things were propagated from the view of atheist scientist with the aim of discrediting the Bible and by extension the existence of God.

needanswer:


At least we can agree on one thing, which is - it's not a god of the gaps argument. As for the "fallacy of false equivalence", I don't stand on that ground either. Dark energy is a natural phenomenon and not equivalent to God in any way, there is no comparison.

I literal have to re-explain my simple logical point. This is it; just because something can't be proved by been seen or measured or both doesn't mean it doesn't exist, AS LONG AS YOU CAN STILL PERCEIVE IT IN OTHER WAYS WHICH MAY NOT BE DIRECTLY.

Dark energy is just a scenario to illustrate this in practical terms that science can relate too and not that it is an equivalent, so get my point correctly.

Your point is logically fallacious. Dark energy hypothesis is not in the same class with belief in a god. That is why it's falsely equivalent.

LordReed:

LoL! Says the guy who made a blatantly false blanket statement about atheists. BTW I didn't deny anything, I am pointing out your misinformation.

You really don’t get it, do you? Even the abiogenesis theory that claims to explain the origin of life still has evolution intertwined into its mix but you’re not ready for that discussion.

LordReed:


Your point is logically fallacious. Dark energy hypothesis is not in the same class with belief in a god. That is why it's falsely equivalent.

Wrong! You are the one grouping them in the same class rather than seeing it only as an example.

DappaD:


You really don’t get it, do you? Even the abiogenesis theory that claims to explain the origin of life still has evolution intertwined into its mix but you’re not ready for that discussion.

How does it have evolution intertwined?

needanswer:


Wrong! You are the one grouping them in the same class rather than seeing it only as an example.

Your topic heading says it all. You attempting to draw parallels between the dark energy hypothesis and faith in a god. You even go ahead to say scientists believe in dark energy, which they most certainly don't but you use that phrase so that you can get your point across. Scientists posit dark energy because they can something affecting the universe, that is totally not belief as you intend it to mean.

LordReed:

How does it have evolution intertwined?

Abiogenesis involves living organisms arising from non-living organisms and developing from simple to complex cell structures over a considerable amount of time—which is basically evolution & laughable if you ask me.
Even scientists agree that the process of abiogenesis remains a mystery—yet this is the belief that most atheists have adopted as a substitute for their belief in the Creation theory.

LordReed:


Your topic heading says it all. You attempting to draw parallels between the dark energy hypothesis and faith in a god. You even go ahead to say scientists believe in dark energy, which they most certainly don't but you use that phrase so that you can get your point across. Scientists posit dark energy because they can something affecting the universe, that is totally not belief as you intend it to mean.

Wrong! If you are going to sound unscientific it's fine, but I am not interested in lecturing you on that.
And my topic heading isn't drawing any PARALLELS but citing Dark energy as an example.

needanswer:


Wrong! If you are going to sound unscientific it's fine, but I am not interested in lecturing you on that.
And my topic heading isn't drawing any PARALLELS but citing Dark energy as an example.

You are the one saying scientists believe in dark energy, that is a most unscientific language.

Example of what?

LordReed:


You are the one saying scientists believe in dark energy, that is a most unscientific language.

Example of what?

Scientists believe in dark energy that's a statement of fact, if you don't believe, speak only for yourself.

DappaD:


Abiogenesis involves living organisms arising from non-living organisms and developing from simple to complex cell structures over a considerable amount of time—which is basically evolution & laughable if you ask me.
Even scientists agree that the process of abiogenesis remains a mystery—yet this is the belief that most atheists have adopted as a substitute for their belief in the Creation theory.

Wrong. Abiogenesis is about how hypothetically life came from non living matter. It says nothing about going from simple to complex cell structure.

Abiogenesis may yet be a mystery but it holds more potential explanation than a tale of magic and talking snakes.

needanswer:


Scientists believe in dark energy that's a statement of fact, if you don't believe, speak only for yourself.

That is not a statement of fact. You are are the one doing all the believing here.

LordReed:


That is not a statement of fact. You are are the one doing all the believing here.

Don't waste your time with me, you either prove this statement of yours (which you can't) or just keep deceiving yourself.

EMILO2STAY:
you should be talking about evidence of God from things that can be seen not things that cannot be seen. and again if got want to use planets and galaxies as an evidence for God, then you are speaking from the view point of atheism because this things were propagated from the view of atheist scientist with the aim of discrediting the Bible and by extension the existence of God.

You obviously read in a haste and understood nothing about my write up.

LordReed:

Wrong. Abiogenesis is about how hypothetically life came from non living matter. It says nothing about going from simple to complex cell structure.
Abiogenesis may yet be a mystery but it holds more potential explanation than a tale of magic and talking snakes.

The Creation theory will give abiogenesis a run for its money any time any day. So in essence, those scientists hope that abiogenesis is true since it is widely accepted amongst them? Isn’t that the belief they have since they haven’t seen it with their own two eyes—which is similar to the belief in a God that Creationists haven’t seen?

needanswer:


You obviously read in a haste and understood nothing about my write up.

tell me what I missed .

EMILO2STAY:
tell me what I missed .

I am simply dissecting atheist logic, that only what can be SEEN or MEASURED is real, but there is also a third category science believe in, that is what can be PERCEIVED can also be real, even if you cant see or measure it.

Atheists fail to understand this third aspect which is what the write up is about and which you totally missed by a mile.

DappaD:


The Creation theory will give abiogenesis a run for its money any time any day. So in essence, those scientists hope that abiogenesis is true since it is widely accepted amongst them? Isn’t that the belief they have since they haven’t seen it with their own two eyes—which is similar to the belief in a God that Creationists haven’t seen?

Bro you are correct, science believe in three things, what can be SEEN, MEASURED or PERCEIVED. Abiogenesis falls under the third category of perceive.

LordReed:


Abiogenesis may yet be a mystery but it holds more potential explanation than a tale of magic and talking snakes.

Lol.
You think Abiogenesis is a mystery now but you believe it nevertheless. What makes you different from people that believe in a mystery diety?
-To me, it takes more faith to believe in an evolutionary theory than Skydaddy.

What don't you leave everyone to choose their mystery?

needanswer:


I am simply dissecting atheist logic, that only what can be SEEN or MEASURED is real, but there is also a third category science believe in, that is what can be PERCEIVED can also be real, even if you cant see or measure it.

Atheists fail to understand this third aspect which is what the write up is about and which you totally missed by a mile.

I understand perfectly the point your trying to make. but you used space, planets and galaxies to prove a point. these things mainstream science have claimed to have been measure and seen yet they lack biblical support. this is why i said you are shooting yourself on the foot.

you are using the wrong example. it can be used against you.

EMILO2STAY:
I understand perfectly the point your trying to make. but you used space, planets and galaxies to prove a point. these things mainstream science have claimed to have been measure and seen yet they lack biblical support. this is why i said you are shooting yourself on the foot.

you are using the wrong example. it can be used against you.

I am not you and you are not me, I am a scientist myself and I understand it in and out. So if science scares you then that's your take and not mine. And from your reply you don't even know what I'm up about. Let me handle it, you do your thing.

needanswer:


I am not you and you are not me, I am a scientist myself and I understand it in and out. So if science scares you then that's your take and not mine. And from your reply you don't even know what I'm up about. Let me handle it, you do your thing.

lol@ I am a scientist. if you understand galaxies in and out then tell me how did you measure and detect it so as to come to such conclusion. science is confirmed by repeatable, testable and observable experiments, so tell me how you understand dark energy and space and galaxies using those scientific methods.

Dtruthspeaker:


Abel was murdered and did not have children, so Africa is an offspring of Cain, mostly.

What race was Cain?

haddeylium:


Lol.
You think Abiogenesis is a mystery now but you believe it nevertheless. What makes you different from people that believe in a mystery diety?
-To me, it takes more faith to believe in an evolutionary theory than Skydaddy.

What don't you leave everyone to choose their mystery?

Where did you see me say I believe it? It requires no belief, it is either true or not true, investigation will reveal that.

Did you see me say nobody should believe in sky daddy?

EMILO2STAY:
lol@ I am a scientist. if you understand galaxies in and out then tell me how did you measure and detect it so as to come to such conclusion. science is confirmed by repeatable, testable and observable experiments, so tell me how you understand dark energy and space and galaxies using those scientific methods.

For someone who doesn't belief science believes in dark energy, it would be a waste of my time explaining it to you.

You already made an unscientific claim, let me recover from that first.

DappaD:


The Creation theory will give abiogenesis a run for its money any time any day. So in essence, those scientists hope that abiogenesis is true since it is widely accepted amongst them? Isn’t that the belief they have since they haven’t seen it with their own two eyes—which is similar to the belief in a God that Creationists haven’t seen?

LMFAO @ creation theory. OMFD!

Just like the authorities do not need to see with their own eyes to find you guilty, they don't have to see it with their own eyes to prove it is correct.

No it is not similar to faith in a god because it will be a conclusion reached by hard evidence, not hearsay and fanciful tales.

needanswer:


Don't waste your time with me, you either prove this statement of yours (which you can't) or just keep deceiving yourself.

You are the one who made a statement and called it fact. Produce the fact.