Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 4/9/07 09:23 PM, SolInvictus wrote:

fair enough, its just that everything we do is based on some form of belief or assumption but those are never likened to religions.

Altho, some religions do not have a God.

At 4/9/07 09:25 PM, Memorize wrote: Altho, some religions do not have a God.

yes but those are a set of beliefs and existential philosophies which form the ideology of one religion whereas atheism is the singular belief in the lack of a higher power.

Has anyone discussed the 'Spear of Destiny' yet?

At 4/9/07 08:53 PM, Memorize wrote:

At 4/9/07 08:49 PM, Brick-top wrote:

Well done, have a cookie.

I deserve one. You don't. You got it wrong.

Yes, very good.

At 4/9/07 09:07 PM, EndGameOmega wrote:

Actually they do. The phenomenon is know as quantum fluctuations, and allows for matter and energy to come into existence for brief periods of time with out violating conservation of matter and energy. The only stipulation is that they need to fade from existence after a very short period of time (on the order of a plank second). But there are various phenomenon, and events in the universe in which they would be able to continue to exist. Basically it all stems from the Heisenberg uncertainty principle: (delta x)(delta p) >= hbar/2, where delta is change, x is position, p is momentum, and hbar is the reduced plank constint. See: Quantum Fluctuation

This is a very common argument, if a atheist is asked about were everything comes from he/she just says its is made from somthing smaller, it is a neat way to not answer the question and sound smart at the same time, argo how common it is.

The question why only stems from how in the case of a sentient entities interaction; Other wise the question becomes one of how and is purely mechanics.

Read my posts about the monkey and the ants to learn the difference between intelligence and science.

But again, the explanations of religion are inherently unprovable, untestable, and quite often illogical; As such I contend that the explanations of religion are irrelevant.

But atheism has no explanation in responce to relligions so it should not be seen as a replacement for it.

There is a difference between science and intelligence, those who dont know are ignorent.

At 4/9/07 05:19 AM, EndGameOmega wrote:

At 4/8/07 08:17 PM, Dre-Man wrote: And atheism is just completely based on logic and intelligence

Yes, it is. In fact that's all it is, logic and intelligence, but heres the really neat thing, so are some systems of belief. However atheism has two major points in its faveor:

You are a fool, go to the Questions about the Universe + God thread and realise that you have no scientific explanation for anything that we don't.

Logic and intellgience? I'm so glad you view yourself and your views as so much superior to everyone elses beliefs.

technically God does exist outside of logic.

At 4/10/07 10:05 AM, Zoraxe7 wrote: But atheism has no explanation in responce to relligions so it should not be seen as a replacement for it.

You're wrong. Although Athiests may not have a specific explanation, this simple phrase is still true: "I may not know what is, but I do know some of what is not." Simply because Athiests don't know what the Ultimate Answer may be doesn't mean they can't tell BS when they see it-- and hence the reason they reject religion.

At 4/10/07 10:43 AM, SolInvictus wrote: technically God does exist outside of logic.

That's not the point.

The Big Bang = Teeny weeny little "explodes", matter and gas goes everywhere, universe is formed over trillions and trillions of years.

Where did the big rock come from? Where did the thing that created the big rock come from, and the creator before that, and the creator before that, and the creator before that? Who was the original creator, if not a God?

Such a question can not be answered scientifically, and therefore ALSO exists outside of logic.

Don't try to tell me that your beliefs are based soley upon logic and intelligence ever, ever again.

At 4/10/07 11:10 AM, Dre-Man wrote: Such a question can not be answered scientifically, and therefore ALSO exists outside of logic.

everything comes back to infinite regress, a point where you can keep asking where did that come from and where did the thing before that thing come from, ad infinitum

its not an argument but a problem all explanations for the origins of existence face including God.

At 4/10/07 10:05 AM, Zoraxe7 wrote:

This is a very common argument, if a atheist is asked about were everything comes from he/she just says its is made from somthing smaller, it is a neat way to not answer the question and sound smart at the same time, argo how common it is.

I did answer the question. Quantum fluctuations occur and can be measured, they allow matter and energy to come into existence on there own, they are also the cause of every form of radiation except for SF. If there is something in specif you don't understand then ask me and I will answer it, but Quantum fluctuations are a fundamental part of Quantum Mechanics, and with out them your computer doesn't work, light can't be emitted from exited atoms, etc...

Read my posts about the monkey and the ants to learn the difference between intelligence and science.

But atheism has no explanation in responce to relligions so it should not be seen as a replacement for it.

What explanations are you talking about? Give me one.

There is a difference between science and intelligence, those who dont know are ignorent.

Yes, the one is a methodology, and the other is an intrinsic quality of computational systems.

At 4/10/07 10:41 AM, Dre-Man wrote:

You are a fool, go to the Questions about the Universe + God thread and realise that you have no scientific explanation for anything that we don't.

I never said I did, remember science doesn't, and can't acknowledge the existence of god, unless measurable evidence for its existence is shown.

Logic and intellgience? I'm so glad you view yourself and your views as so much superior to everyone elses beliefs.

Did you actually read what I wrote? I didn't say just atheism is biased logic and intelligence I said many form of belief systems are also, however I (personally) find atheism to be more logical, if you feel it isn't then explain why you feel it isn't.

At 4/10/07 10:43 AM, SolInvictus wrote: technically God does exist outside of logic.

Of course, god would have to be. But again thats my major problem with the concept.

At 4/10/07 11:10 AM, Dre-Man wrote: That's not the point.

The Big Bang = Teeny weeny little "explodes", matter and gas goes everywhere, universe is formed over trillions and trillions of years.

1 – It wasn't an explosion.
2 – It wasn't trillions of years ago, but about 13.7 +/- .2 billion

Where did the big rock come from? Where did the thing that created the big rock come from, and the creator before that, and the creator before that, and the creator before that? Who was the original creator, if not a God?

Your making the assumption of a priory, there doesn't have to be one. I've also mentioned this before but if string theory is correct, there isn't a true beging as the M multvers (of which we are a part of) has linear topology, and therefor is ether circuler in nature, or extends back towards infinity, and forward to the same.

Such a question can not be answered scientifically, and therefore ALSO exists outside of logic.

Yes they can.

Don't try to tell me that your beliefs are based soley upon logic and intelligence ever, ever again.

To bad they are; And so should yours. If god exist then it isn't bound by logic it can't be, fine, but that's no excuses for everything else in your belief system to not be. The only thing we have any certainty about is this existence to so fragrantly ignore it is to counter what makes humans so great, our ability to understand and reason.

At 4/10/07 12:33 PM, EndGameOmega wrote:

I did answer the question. Quantum fluctuations occur and can be measured, they allow matter and energy to come into existence on there own, they are also the cause of every form of radiation except for SF. If there is something in specif you don't understand then ask me and I will answer it, but Quantum fluctuations are a fundamental part of Quantum Mechanics, and with out them your computer doesn't work, light can't be emitted from exited atoms, etc...

What causes these flutuations, if matter and energy came into exsistance by them selvs than how, if it is made up of some thing els than you just proved my point, if not than your a fool that thinks that matter can appear out of nothing and that energy can be created and destroyed.

What explanations are you talking about? Give me one.

Why does energy exsist, same thing with matter and everything els.

Yes, the one is a methodology, and the other is an intrinsic quality of computational systems.

Because monkeys have enuf science to get ants out of an ant hill but humans wonder at life and exsistance.

At 4/10/07 02:03 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote:
What causes these flutuations, if matter and energy came into exsistance by them selvs than how, if it is made up of some thing els than you just proved my point, if not than your a fool that thinks that matter can appear out of nothing and that energy can be created and destroyed.

Quantum fluctuations are a basic feature of spacetime. What causes the fluctuations is spacetime itself, and the rules that govern it. Conservation of Matter and Energy is not a hard-and-fast law, it gets bent all the time through pair creation and these quantum fluctuations. And it is possible that a fluctuation large enough ocurred that popped into existance all of our matter/energy, which, instead of annhiliating itself (like it usually does, balancing the books so to speak) had just slightly (like 1%) more matter than antimatter, and so rapidly expanded into our universe instead of winking out.

Why does energy exsist, same thing with matter and everything els.

It's a feature of the laws of spacetime. You're still asking "why" while trying to disguise it as "how". "Why" has no meaning in science.

At 4/10/07 02:03 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote:

What causes these flutuations, if matter and energy came into exsistance by them selvs than how, if it is made up of some thing els than you just proved my point, if not than your a fool that thinks that matter can appear out of nothing and that energy can be created and destroyed.

What Ravariel said is more or less correct “Quantum fluctuations are a basic feature of spacetime”. If you want to get more specific I explained this a few post up, but here goes again. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle states that its not possible to know the position and momentum of a particle only to any degree, and that the limit of this is (delta x)(delta p) >= hbar/2, where p is momentum, and x is position, hbar is a constant know as the reduced Planck's constant. This equation implies the conservation of energy an momentum can be violated for short times (i.e. E^2 =/= m^2c^4 + p^2c^2 ), see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_prin ciple
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_relativi ty
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_particle
Read these links. Even if you don’t fully understand them read them. You’ll get a better idea what I’m talking about.

Now when you get down to the sub atomic realm you’ll start to see this happen, particles will literally pop into and out of existence in short order. The more massive the particle the shorter the time its likely to exist, but there are phenomena in the universe which can, and do force the particles to continue to exist effectively making them real. It can also further come about due to the wave like explanation for spacetime.

And If I’m a fool then nothing in QM makes sense, your computer can not work, nor can you’re TV, cell phone, or anything which involves changing energy states.

Why does energy exsist, same thing with matter and everything els.

Short answer, they’re properties of spacetime, and vice versa. The exist as wave fluctuations and probabilities in spacetime. There is no “why”, just how.

Because monkeys have enuf science to get ants out of an ant hill but humans wonder at life and exsistance.

One how do you know monkeys don’t ponder there existence? This isn’t a stupid question, how do you know? Chimps and other higher apes, can recognize them self’s in a mirror, they have similar neo-cortexes (though there’s are admittedly smaller), they’ve been taught language, and some even have a rudimentary form of communication with each other. So I ask again, how do you know that only we ask such questions?

Two, your response is irrelevant, like I said the one is a methodology (science), and the other is an intrinsic quality of computational systems (intelgence). With science we are able to probe our existence and discover the reasons our universe works, and how we came to be hear. Your statement neither refutes what I said, nor does it expand upon it.

Whoa, heavy shit guys... Honestly, we should just pull out some doobies and ZONE, and the answer will like, TOTALLY come to us! Have u even read the origional post? i have! read te second one two, and it should be over. Fact: Adam and Eve were not just poof, made. Evoloution happened. How else did all this life appear? If u say God made it, I swear to God i'll...oops, i mean, I swear to moses I kick ur ass! lol, love it.

At 4/10/07 12:33 PM, EndGameOmega wrote:

At 4/10/07 11:10 AM, Dre-Man wrote: That's not the point.

The Big Bang = Teeny weeny little "explodes", matter and gas goes everywhere, universe is formed over trillions and trillions of years.

1 – It wasn't an explosion.

Hence the quotes around the word "explodes", fucktard.

2 – It wasn't trillions of years ago, but about 13.7 +/- .2 billion

Oh dear, guess making that simple mistake was really worth pointing out, wasn't it Omega? I hope you enjoyed yourself.

Where did the big rock come from? Where did the thing that created the big rock come from, and the creator before that, and the creator before that, and the creator before that? Who was the original creator, if not a God?

Your making the assumption of a priory, there doesn't have to be one. I've also mentioned this before but if string theory is correct, there isn't a true beging as the M multvers (of which we are a part of) has linear topology, and therefor is ether circuler in nature, or extends back towards infinity, and forward to the same.

Everything has proven to be created by something, if that's not true, well, fuck, I guess the first human popped out of thin air and the rest were found in cabbage patches, huh Omega?

Such a question can not be answered scientifically, and therefore ALSO exists outside of logic.

Yes they can.

Uh, no, no dear Omega, at least not yet.

The concept of God is just as logical as your dumbass belief, and if you think otherwise, you're even more of an idiot, which, would be pretty pathetic.

Don't try to tell me that your beliefs are based soley upon logic and intelligence ever, ever again.

To bad they are; And so should yours. If god exist then it isn't bound by logic it can't be, fine, but that's no excuses for everything else in your belief system to not be. The only thing we have any certainty about is this existence to so fragrantly ignore it is to counter what makes humans so great, our ability to understand and reason.

The only problem is, humans like you can't seem to understand or reason with the fact that you have no higher ground of logic than anyone else. I don't care if a person believes we were popped out by little green aliens from the planet Grizzlegog, you're not any more logical than they are.

At 4/10/07 10:05 AM, Zoraxe7 wrote:

But atheism has no explanation in responce to relligions so it should not be seen as a replacement for it.

As much as we'd like to have an answer for all the deep questions in our lives, that doesn't mean we should accept some random thing just to have an answer.

When scientists try to figure out how something works, when they can't figure it out they don't just say "WELL IT MUST BE MAGIC LOL" and don't admit they have no answer. They wait until they have found out the real reason why.

Sometimes there is no answer to a question because there's no logical proof of the solution yet. It's illogical just to pick one answer just so you can have one. While it feels better to be able to say you know, that doesn't mean you're right.

At 4/10/07 07:21 PM, Dre-Man wrote:

Hence the quotes around the word "explodes", fucktard.

Fair enough.

Oh dear, guess making that simple mistake was really worth pointing out, wasn't it Omega? I hope you enjoyed yourself.

Yes, it was worth pointing out. It show a general lack of understanding of the BASIC concepts in science. It shows me that you've not read anything into my arguments or the reference materials I've put up. You see Dre, this is why people complained about your age, it has nothing to do with physical age but rather your limited understanding and knowledge of the world that usually accompanies minors, and even some adults. You've not countered any of my arguments and have brought nothing to the table but the occasional insult and temper.

Everything has proven to be created by something, if that's not true, well, fuck, I guess the first human popped out of thin air and the rest were found in cabbage patches, huh Omega?

Incorrect on two grounds; One I've mentioned this before there are quantum fluctuation, and virtual particles that exist in the vacuum. These things do just pop into and out of existence from nothing, we can measure them, and show that they exist, and there required to midgate any change in energy states (things like radiation.).

Uh, no, no dear Omega, at least not yet.

Dre, I've pointed out string theory as an example of scientific origin many times. It's a perfectly valid concept to which you've not brought forth any counter argument against. So if it can't be correct, then explain to me why, explain why string theory is wrong.

The concept of God is just as logical as your dumbass belief, and if you think otherwise, you're even more of an idiot, which, would be pretty pathetic.

No it isn't, and you've yet to explain your self and your position, how can god be logical? I bring up a couple points in previous post if you want to see my arguments against an omnipotent god (as an example, the other perfections are also illogical). You fling insults around in an attempt to get me to shut up as if by somehow responding to your post makes your insult true. It's ineffective and simply shows to other more neutral posters that you haven't much ground too stand on.

The only problem is, humans like you can't seem to understand or reason with the fact that you have no higher ground of logic than anyone else.

Dre, the concept of god is an illogical one, and to say god exist out side the realm of logic simply proves as much. I given reasons before, but they all stem from the perfections that a god should have (omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence, etc...) which are contradictory to each other and them selfs. You can't get around this argument, god is an illogical construct, that doesn't mean god can't exist, but simply that if it dose then logic is inherently flawed and we no longer have the tools to explain anything or under stand anything. We can't even said that we exist as “Cogito Ergo Sum” (I think therefor I am), doesn't even hold any more. Could there be some higher set of logic? Of course there could be, but this is my problem with the whole god idea, we don't know it, and we can't even know if it's real or not. Its like running around your room trying to find an invisible unicorn, it's a futile effort. On the other hand if someone was to come up with a new logic set which could explain god then I would consider it, but with out it I don't see the point in believing in a god. So in those senses yes I do see atheism as a more logical construction. If it isn't then prove to me it isn't, come up with a good counter argument. Your not an idiot Dre, you should be able to find one, or come up with one if it exist.

I don't care if a person believes we were popped out by little green aliens from the planet Grizzlegog, you're not any more logical than they are.

So would you say that this is just as logical as Christianity?

At 4/10/07 11:12 PM, EndGameOmega wrote:

At 4/10/07 07:21 PM, Dre-Man wrote: Oh dear, guess making that simple mistake was really worth pointing out, wasn't it Omega? I hope you enjoyed yourself.

Yes, it was worth pointing out. It show a general lack of understanding of the BASIC concepts in science. It shows me that you've not read anything into my arguments or the reference materials I've put up. You see Dre, this is why people complained about your age, it has nothing to do with physical age but rather your limited understanding and knowledge of the world that usually accompanies minors, and even some adults. You've not countered any of my arguments and have brought nothing to the table but the occasional insult and temper.

Oh my, yes, a purposeful exaggeration of the amount of years that the planetary bodies took to form after the Big Bang was definately a clear representation of my lack of scientific knowledge, once again Omega, you are on a far higher ground of logic than me and my beliefs, as well as any other theists. I applaud your prejudice, self superior view, and stereotypes.

Everything has proven to be created by something, if that's not true, well, fuck, I guess the first human popped out of thin air and the rest were found in cabbage patches, huh Omega?

Incorrect on two grounds; One I've mentioned this before there are quantum fluctuation, and virtual particles that exist in the vacuum. These things do just pop into and out of existence from nothing, we can measure them, and show that they exist, and there required to midgate any change in energy states (things like radiation.).

I might not be an expert in quantum physics, but I sure as hell know that the majority of the things you're spouting off as science and logic, are all simply very whimsical theories that truly don't have much standing at all.

Uh, no, no dear Omega, at least not yet.

Dre, I've pointed out string theory as an example of scientific origin many times. It's a perfectly valid concept to which you've not brought forth any counter argument against. So if it can't be correct, then explain to me why, explain why string theory is wrong.

Because the string theory is very, very experimental and very much based on belief alone. WHADDAYA KNOW?! JUST LIKE RELIGION!

The concept of God is just as logical as your dumbass belief, and if you think otherwise, you're even more of an idiot, which, would be pretty pathetic.

No it isn't, and you've yet to explain your self and your position, how can god be logical? I bring up a couple points in previous post if you want to see my arguments against an omnipotent god (as an example, the other perfections are also illogical). You fling insults around in an attempt to get me to shut up as if by somehow responding to your post makes your insult true. It's ineffective and simply shows to other more neutral posters that you haven't much ground too stand on.

I never said God was logical, I said that your beliefs aren't any more logical than mine. And I was right.

You done with your self superiority bullshit, or are you just gonna keep thinking that you're more intelligent than any theist because of your beliefs?

The only problem is, humans like you can't seem to understand or reason with the fact that you have no higher ground of logic than anyone else.

Dre, the concept of god is an illogical one, and to say god exist out side the realm of logic simply proves as much. I given reasons before, but they all stem from the perfections that a god should have (omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence, etc...) which are contradictory to each other and them selfs. You can't get around this argument, god is an illogical construct, that doesn't mean god can't exist, but simply that if it dose then logic is inherently flawed and we no longer have the tools to explain anything or under stand anything. We can't even said that we exist as “Cogito Ergo Sum” (I think therefor I am), doesn't even hold any more. Could there be some higher set of logic? Of course there could be, but this is my problem with the whole god idea, we don't know it, and we can't even know if it's real or not. Its like running around your room trying to find an invisible unicorn, it's a futile effort. On the other hand if someone was to come up with a new logic set which could explain god then I would consider it, but with out it I don't see the point in believing in a god. So in those senses yes I do see atheism as a more logical construction. If it isn't then prove to me it isn't, come up with a good counter argument. Your not an idiot Dre, you should be able to find one, or come up with one if it exist.

In that entire rant of verbal diarrhea, you failed to explain how you are on higher grounds of logic than I. I actually agree with you, the concept of God isn't based on logic, so you're telling me something I already know. What you've failed to explain is how you've come to the conclusion that you're EVER SO much more logical in your belief than I am in mine.

I don't care if a person believes we were popped out by little green aliens from the planet Grizzlegog, you're not any more logical than they are.

So would you say that this is just as logical as Christianity?

Just as logical? Yes. But that doesn't really have much standing seing that logic isn't a major factor in faith.

At 4/10/07 11:10 AM, Dre-Man wrote: The Big Bang = Teeny weeny little "explodes", matter and gas goes everywhere, universe is formed over trillions and trillions of years.

Except thats not what the big bang is.

At 4/11/07 12:06 AM, fahrenheit wrote:

At 4/10/07 11:10 AM, Dre-Man wrote: The Big Bang = Teeny weeny little "explodes", matter and gas goes everywhere, universe is formed over trillions and trillions of years.

Except thats not what the big bang is.

Every time I use a little summarization, a simpler version, I get a "THAT'S NOT WHAT HAPPENED!"

At 4/11/07 12:27 AM, Dre-Man wrote: Every time I use a little summarization, a simpler version, I get a "THAT'S NOT WHAT HAPPENED!"

Because of course, I used all caps.
And your litle "summarization" is wrong because the most common belief is that there was no creation, and there was no "explosions".

At 4/11/07 12:03 AM, Dre-Man wrote:

Oh my, yes, a purposeful exaggeration of the amount of years that the planetary bodies took to form after the Big Bang was definately a clear representation of my lack of scientific knowledge, once again Omega, you are on a far higher ground of logic than me and my beliefs, as well as any other theists. I applaud your prejudice, self superior view, and stereotypes.

Yes it is; Your ether purposefully misstating the age or are ignorant of it, ether one show a direct lack of knowledge on your part, and possible dishonesty as well. You could have simply stated that you where mistaken or exaggerating instead you've pushed the point.

Where did I ever knock any theist in any of my post? Where have I insulted any ones belief system? Everything I've brought up have been valid arguments devoid of prejudicial intent. The closes thing to a stereotype I have committed was in my argument against the arc, and my repeated implication of creationist as YEC, I appolgise for this, however it should have been realized that I was not lumping all creationist into this band wagon, but simply using the terminology of the YECs.

I might not be an expert in quantum physics, but I sure as hell know that the majority of the things you're spouting off as science and logic, are all simply very whimsical theories that truly don't have much standing at all.

Then you really don't know jack about Quantum. Virtual particles, and energy non conservation are a large part of Quantum Mechanic, and a cornerstone of Quantum Field Theory; They are REQUIRED in order for the world to work, and we have direct evidence of there existence, read the links I posted, and branch off. Again if you don't believe me then read up on it, otherwise stop arguing the point, it makes you sound ignorant, to any one who knows QM.

Because the string theory is very, very experimental and very much based on belief alone. WHADDAYA KNOW?! JUST LIKE RELIGION!

Every theory in science is experimental, if it wasn't it wouldn't be science. There's no belief in string theory to speak of, at lest not the kind that your insinuating. If you mean to say that its currently undergoing a large amount of experimental scrutiny, thats because we finally have, or will have, the accelerators needed to probe the energy scales required to test some more of the sideline and spcific predictions of string theory. String theory in its current for predicts every thing in physics, from Classical, QM, QED, and QFT, all as appropriate approximations.

I never said God was logical, I said that your beliefs aren't any more logical than mine. And I was right.

But that doesn't follow, your belief system has an illogical component. As far as I can see mine doesn't, however if you see anything that isn't logical in my belief structure point it out, I will ether clarify my system or modify it.

You done with your self superiority bullshit, or are you just gonna keep thinking that you're more intelligent than any theist because of your beliefs?

I NEVER said I was more intelligent, and I never implied it ether, stop putting words in my mouth. I have a lot of respect for many theist, my best friend is a catholic, and one hell of physicist, and is far more intelligent then I can ever hope to be, so back off.

In that entire rant of verbal diarrhea, you failed to explain how you are on higher grounds of logic than I. I actually agree with you, the concept of God isn't based on logic, so you're telling me something I already know. What you've failed to explain is how you've come to the conclusion that you're EVER SO much more logical in your belief than I am in mine.

Because the concept of god is illogical... part of your belief system rest on the concept of something illogic therefor it has some inherent illogicalness to it.

Just as logical? Yes. But that doesn't really have much standing seing that logic isn't a major factor in faith.

So logic has nothing, or at lest little to do with faith. Then what problem do you have with me saying my faith is logical? If its component is trivial then it shouldn't matter. As a final aside I've never said atheism is a more intelligent choice, simply that its more grounded in logic and empiricism.

Fuck Religion

Fuck Science

The answer to everything is: it just happened like that. Nothing really has a reason.

At 4/11/07 09:39 AM, DangerouslyRetarded wrote: Fuck Religion

Fuck Science

The answer to everything is: it just happened like that. Nothing really has a reason.

oh, the irony. You are using the free speech that religion took part in getting. And you are posting this on a computer on the internet that science had a part in creating.

At 4/11/07 11:31 AM, Drakim wrote: oh, the irony. You are using the free speech that religion took part in getting.

religion took part in getting?

At 4/11/07 02:04 PM, SolInvictus wrote:

At 4/11/07 11:31 AM, Drakim wrote: oh, the irony. You are using the free speech that religion took part in getting.

religion took part in getting?

Well, religion has also suppressed freedom of speech over the ages, but, religions have often helped promote equality, that God loves everybody, but then again, religion has often suppressed woman and gay people. Bah, I don't know >> Forget I said anything.

At 4/11/07 02:21 PM, Drakim wrote: Bah, I don't know >> Forget I said anything.

Its nice to think before you speak, isnt it.

At 4/11/07 09:10 PM, fahrenheit wrote:

At 4/11/07 02:21 PM, Drakim wrote: Bah, I don't know >> Forget I said anything.

Its nice to think before you speak, isnt it.

Nobody is perfect. Or do you claim every single post you have made is correct?

The real goal lies in admiting you can be wrong, instead of being all bitchy and throwing insults. A lot of people here on NG would just have posted "fuck you" or ignored it altogether if somebody pointed out something wrong with their post.

At 4/10/07 11:10 AM, Dre-Man wrote:

At 4/10/07 10:43 AM, SolInvictus wrote: technically God does exist outside of logic.

That's not the point.

The Big Bang = Teeny weeny little "explodes", matter and gas goes everywhere, universe is formed over trillions and trillions of years.

Teeny weeny little is very possible! Enough gravity on something, if there is something stopping you getter to the source of that gravity, you will be curshed and compressed into a very teeny tiny thing, not able to see, therefore, the Big Bang probably was a super-super-super-super-super massive black hole, that eventually radiates away its energy, it takes millions of trillions of years but it happens, and then the singularity that the whole universe had been sucked into was released again... BIG BANG > BIG CRUNCH > BIG BANG > BIG CRUNCH > and so on

Where did the big rock come from? Where did the thing that created the big rock come from, and the creator before that, and the creator before that, and the creator before that? Who was the original creator, if not a God?

And there is the theory that there is multiple universes, a hairs breadth apart, and then one is empty, the other is full say, and even the slightest touch would result in masses of energy being created, and the full universes content spileld into the empty universes content, and starts over again and so on

Such a question can not be answered scientifically, and therefore ALSO exists outside of logic.

Yes it can, I just explained 2 theories

Don't try to tell me that your beliefs are based soley upon logic and intelligence ever, ever again.

God couldn't possibly exist,or else, people would't die, and the universe wouldn't end, because its going to end of either heat death, or the big crunch!