Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 10/18/07 11:05 PM, Smith82 wrote: The thing is, as a lot of you have said, that being wrong sucks.

not if you're a scientist.

Science can't explain very much about creation

neither can religion. (no, simply telling a story and stating that it is true is not an explanation)

evolution

religion doesn't mention evolution. how can science not explain something it deals with?

Why aren't monkeys evolving into apes now?

oh good God.

Where did the star that started the big bang come from?

what bloody star are you taking about?

Why aren't there more big bangs?

learn what the big bang is before writing about how it doesn't make sense.

Why don't monkeys have morals?

morals are simply highly developped social structures. a more complex society with more intelligent animals requires more sophistaced social interactions, otherwise known as morals.

Why aren't there gay monkeys?

there are.

The list goes on and on.

the list of misinformation which you have been taught?

This should be my sig... Ye of little faith!

ye of little knowledge?

At 10/18/07 05:05 PM, KarmaStrike wrote: I believe in God, the big bang, and everything else had to start at somewhere!

If everything needs a start, then what started God?

And if you say that God didn't need a start for whatever reason,
doesn't that disprove that "everything needs a start"?

At 10/19/07 03:50 AM, Drakim wrote:
If everything needs a start, then what started God?

And if you say that God didn't need a start for whatever reason,
doesn't that disprove that "everything needs a start"?

Not really. I know this is cheap logic just bear with me.
Denial of God is denial of anything above the influence of natural law correct?
So that means everything must obey the "natural law" and have a beginning.
However god as creator of the universe and thus the universe's laws would outside our scope to understand his "beginning"

At 10/19/07 04:00 AM, therealsylvos wrote:

So that means everything must obey the "natural law" and have a beginning.

Source me that the "natural laws" require everything to have a beginning.

At 10/18/07 10:43 AM, morefngdbs wrote: First, if god gets the credit for creating what surrounds us, then god also deserves the blame for whatever is wrong.

You forgot about one thing, just thing to perfectionize this replay, you must use your COMMON SENSE. You see, God is Good, not to blame something, he is forgiving others' sin, get used to it! I know that not all that surrounds us are good, sometimes are bad like people, things etc., because BAD things aren't the solution to improve your life.

You state ,'God gave us brilliant minds to improve life & make things better', what about the poison gas bombs, nuclear weapons, these minds have also created.

Again the common sense again, see, like what I said, God is Good, not to blame something, he is forgiving others' sin, get used to it! I know that not all that surrounds us are good, sometimes are bad like people, things etc., because BAD things aren't the solution to improve your life. Anyway, about what you've said, People so it, eiher intentionally or unintentionally. If they want to do good or bad, You see, people today use to abuse their rights and power to do bad, like the buglar who wants to steal and steal stuff and doesn't care about anything just to steal. Use common sense.

What about people who murder , rape & kill, not to mention those who control countries & are killing destroying the very country/people they are suppose top rule & take care of.

To answer your question, there, all your questions has one answer and I already given it! Understand and sat the right words before you tell about something,....specifically!
And don't forget, use common sense, lol!

At 10/19/07 04:00 AM, therealsylvos wrote:

At 10/19/07 03:50 AM, Drakim wrote:
If everything needs a start, then what started God?

And if you say that God didn't need a start for whatever reason,
doesn't that disprove that "everything needs a start"?

Not really. I know this is cheap logic just bear with me.
Denial of God is denial of anything above the influence of natural law correct?
So that means everything must obey the "natural law" and have a beginning.
However god as creator of the universe and thus the universe's laws would outside our scope to understand his "beginning"

Good point. However, the statement "everything has to have a begining" would still be false though. A more correct statement would be "everything within those things we know has to have a begining".

----

youngblood26, your post doesn't make any sense at all. Please, use logic and common sense to prove to me that God is good. M'kay?

At 10/19/07 05:04 AM, Drakim wrote: youngblood26, your post doesn't make any sense at all. Please, use logic and common sense to prove to me that God is good. M'kay?

Okay, let's see, why God is Good, simply he created our world, the sky, the light, the living things, etc. which is good for all of us and I thank Him for these. That's my reason, so your saying that I have no common sense?

I guess your not a Christian to know why God is Good and asking somebody why He is good? plz. another topic to talk!

At 10/19/07 05:54 AM, youngblood26 wrote:

At 10/19/07 05:04 AM, Drakim wrote: youngblood26, your post doesn't make any sense at all. Please, use logic and common sense to prove to me that God is good. M'kay?

Okay, let's see, why God is Good, simply he created our world, the sky, the light, the living things, etc. which is good for all of us and I thank Him for these. That's my reason, so your saying that I have no common sense?

Except that doesn't make sense. If god created the universe and everything in it, then he had to have created all the evil in it as well. How can something which is fundamentally good create, and allow evil? And no, freewill is not an answer to this question, as god being all good would never have allowed a universe to exist with evil in it in the first place.

You very well may have some common sense, but logic certainly isn't your forte.

I guess your not a Christian to know why God is Good and asking somebody why He is good? plz. another topic to talk!

I believe Drakim is an atheist, so no he doesn't believe in a god or gods.

At 10/19/07 05:54 AM, youngblood26 wrote:

At 10/19/07 05:04 AM, Drakim wrote: youngblood26, your post doesn't make any sense at all. Please, use logic and common sense to prove to me that God is good. M'kay?

Okay, let's see, why God is Good, simply he created our world, the sky, the light, the living things, etc. which is good for all of us and I thank Him for these. That's my reason, so your saying that I have no common sense?

That isn't enough. Other theories could be that God created this good world so that we would suffer as much as possible. (you can't suffer unless you know what you are missing).

Every good thing in your life could be done so that when you fall, the fall will be the worst possible.

See what I mean? It isn't enough for there to simply be a possibility for God to be good. If you are going to claim that you can use common sense to see that God is good, you need to actualy prove this.

At 10/18/07 11:05 PM, Smith82 wrote: Science can't explain very much about creation/evolution. Why aren't monkeys evolving into apes now?

Monkeys don't evolve into apes. Monkeys evolve, and in some hundreds of thousands of years or more, when they have evolved enough to be a separate being, we'll probably call them something new (flonkeys?). Distinguishing life into species is merely a human construction to easier sort animals/fungi/plants.

Where did the star that started the big bang come from? Why aren't there more big bangs?

AFAIK, there was no star. And no, they don't know where it came from. Five hundred years ago, nobody knew why the sky was blue. Does that make the sky green? And we don't know if there are more big bangs; actually there is a hypothesis that there has been several big bangs, or infinite, throughout time.

Why don't monkeys have morals? Why aren't there gay monkeys? The list goes on and on.

Monkeys have "morals". Source
And there are gay monkeys. Source

At 10/19/07 05:54 AM, youngblood26 wrote:

At 10/19/07 05:04 AM, Drakim wrote: youngblood26, your post doesn't make any sense at all. Please, use logic and common sense to prove to me that God is good. M'kay?

Okay, let's see, why God is Good, simply he created our world, the sky, the light, the living things, etc. which is good for all of us and I thank Him for these. That's my reason, so your saying that I have no common sense?

I guess your not a Christian to know why God is Good and asking somebody why He is good? plz. another topic to talk!

So you're telling me everyone benefits from the way the world is made? I'd say that people sick in HIV, or people dying to natural catastrophies and such things wouldn't agree. And that has NOTHING to do with free will.

At 10/19/07 05:54 AM, youngblood26 wrote:

At 10/19/07 05:04 AM, Drakim wrote: youngblood26, your post doesn't make any sense at all. Please, use logic and common sense to prove to me that God is good. M'kay?

Okay, let's see, why God is Good, simply he created our world, the sky, the light, the living things, etc. which is good for all of us and I thank Him for these. That's my reason, so your saying that I have no common sense?

I guess your not a Christian to know why God is Good and asking somebody why He is good? plz. another topic to talk!

Oh, and if it's good for all of us I'd think nobody would take their own life. But suicide rates are quite high, actually.

suicide is lawlicious. seen a video ofa guy jumping off a building and crashing into a car on youtube. epic lawls

At 10/19/07 10:20 AM, tony4moroney wrote: suicide is lawlicious. seen a video ofa guy jumping off a building and crashing into a car on youtube. epic lawls

sigh...the scary thing is that I agree.

The Internet removes any shred of humanity we have, and it's full of trolls. Clearly the work of the devil!

At 10/19/07 04:48 AM, Sajberhippien wrote:
Source me that the "natural laws" require everything to have a beginning.

its very simple. If the universe has no beginning, that means it is infinitely old. Certain Natural laws, such as entropy, would render the universe unlivable if true.

At 10/19/07 12:41 PM, therealsylvos wrote:

At 10/19/07 04:48 AM, Sajberhippien wrote:
Source me that the "natural laws" require everything to have a beginning.

its very simple. If the universe has no beginning, that means it is infinitely old. Certain Natural laws, such as entropy, would render the universe unlivable if true.

Your argument isn't completely waterproof even if all this is true. For example, entropy might be wrong, thus, the universe wouldn't need a beginning anyway.

So, your argument would better be said,
"If all of our current natural laws are correct, the universe had to have a beginning."

At 10/19/07 01:21 PM, Drakim wrote:
So, your argument would better be said,
"If all of our current natural laws are correct, the universe had to have a beginning."

thats not good enough for you? You have any doubt that entropy is not a fact?

At 10/19/07 10:45 AM, Drakim wrote:

At 10/19/07 10:20 AM, tony4moroney wrote: suicide is lawlicious. seen a video ofa guy jumping off a building and crashing into a car on youtube. epic lawls

sigh...the scary thing is that I agree.

The Internet removes any shred of humanity we have, and it's full of trolls. Clearly the work of the devil!

i disagree.

the internet is a medium which has the potential to remove all unnatural inhibitions concocted by the soupe do jour of political correctedness, society standards and expectations and etiquette and show us for what humanity truly is, stripped bare.

At 10/19/07 01:26 PM, therealsylvos wrote:

At 10/19/07 01:21 PM, Drakim wrote:
So, your argument would better be said,
"If all of our current natural laws are correct, the universe had to have a beginning."

thats not good enough for you? You have any doubt that entropy is not a fact?

I don't. However, we don't yet know what went on at or before t=0 yet. Previous to that point, there may be different rules going on. Also using this argument assumes that the universe is a closed system. This is not something we can say is true.

At 10/19/07 03:03 PM, Ravariel wrote:
I don't. However, we don't yet know what went on at or before t=0 yet. Previous to that point, there may be different rules going on.

The point I was making is that there has to be t=0 what went on before that is way beyond me.

At 10/19/07 01:26 PM, therealsylvos wrote:

At 10/19/07 01:21 PM, Drakim wrote:
So, your argument would better be said,
"If all of our current natural laws are correct, the universe had to have a beginning."

thats not good enough for you? You have any doubt that entropy is not a fact?

I do think so. I was merely making an argument, not arguing my point of view.

And, besides, even though we know entropy is true today, was it true billions of years ago? What if the natural laws are slowly changing? :p

devils advocate FTW

At 10/19/07 03:35 PM, Drakim wrote: And, besides, even though we know entropy is true today, was it true billions of years ago? What if the natural laws are slowly changing? :p

Unfortunately for you, that's the one thing you can't argue. The one basic assumption fo Science is that the laws of physics are constant and have always been how they are today. It's the core assumption that allows Science.

All evidence so far has been consistent with that ideal, but it's not something you can argue. It's the one aspect of belief required for Science.

At 10/18/07 05:36 PM, SolInvictus wrote:

At 10/18/07 10:43 AM, morefngdbs wrote: Charles Darwin did not say we came from apes.
HE said "we have evolved from an "APE LIKE" ancestor.

"if we evolved from chimpanzees, why are they still around"

doesn't it make your blood boil?

;
We (human kind)did not evolve from Chimpanzie's
Here check out this link.

Hey, Look we're related.

At 10/19/07 04:51 AM, youngblood26 wrote:

At 10/18/07 10:43 AM, morefngdbs wrote: First, if god gets the credit for creating what surrounds us, then god also deserves the blame for whatever is wrong.

You forgot about one thing, just thing to perfectionize this replay, you must use your COMMON SENSE. You see, God is Good,
And don't forget, use common sense, lol!

;
One thing I have learned in the short time I've been alive, is that common sense is not very common, case in point you.
I find it unbelievable that a god who can condemn a soul to hell for all eternity just because that person made mistakes. Can possibly be called 'good'.
A god that allows disease,starvation & wars in his name happen, & do nothing to change it, 'GOOD'.

If you really need to label god, then I believe the label 'indifferent' apllies better than anything else.

At 10/19/07 12:41 PM, therealsylvos wrote:

At 10/19/07 04:48 AM, Sajberhippien wrote:
Source me that the "natural laws" require everything to have a beginning.

its very simple. If the universe has no beginning, that means it is infinitely old. Certain Natural laws, such as entropy, would render the universe unlivable if true.

Nothing can be infinetly old, that's correct. However, that is a limit only as long as time exists. For all we know, before Big Bang, it could had been that time didn't exist, or at least was "wrapped up" in the same way that they think a certain number of dimensions are now (unsure of the number, was it 18?).

At 10/19/07 03:55 PM, Sajberhippien wrote:
Nothing can be infinetly old, that's correct. H For all we know, before Big Bang, it could had been that time didn't exist, or at least was "wrapped up" in the same way that they think a certain number of dimensions are now (unsure of the number, was it 18?).

I think its 6? anyway but as long as you realize it has a beginning

time i mean

At 10/19/07 03:55 PM, Sajberhippien wrote:

At 10/19/07 12:41 PM, therealsylvos wrote:

At 10/19/07 04:48 AM, Sajberhippien wrote:
Source me that the "natural laws" require everything to have a beginning.

its very simple. If the universe has no beginning, that means it is infinitely old. Certain Natural laws, such as entropy, would render the universe unlivable if true.

Nothing can be infinetly old, that's correct. However, that is a limit only as long as time exists. For all we know, before Big Bang, it could had been that time didn't exist, or at least was "wrapped up" in the same way that they think a certain number of dimensions are now (unsure of the number, was it 18?).

Okay, what about this (and this isn't really my field, so correct me for any faults I will probably do):
1. Time bends after the speed of light. (Since the speed of light is the same compared to anything)
2. Speed is the rate of motion.
3. For motion to exist, there must be a certain space.
4. In a space which has a volume nearing 0, there can be no speed because of 2 and 3.
5. According to 1 and 4, time has a hard time working in spaces with volumes nearing zero.

Do I have a point or am I totally wrong? I don't have an idea myself...

At 10/19/07 04:14 PM, Sajberhippien wrote:

Okay, what about this (and this isn't really my field, so correct me for any faults I will probably do):
1. Time bends after the speed of light. (Since the speed of light is the same compared to anything)
2. Speed is the rate of motion.
3. For motion to exist, there must be a certain space.
4. In a space which has a volume nearing 0, there can be no speed because of 2 and 3.
5. According to 1 and 4, time has a hard time working in spaces with volumes nearing zero.

Do I have a point or am I totally wrong? I don't have an idea myself...

I don't know if your points are correct, however i would assume and volume at all would suffice for time under your points.

At 10/19/07 12:41 PM, therealsylvos wrote:

At 10/19/07 04:48 AM, Sajberhippien wrote:
Source me that the "natural laws" require everything to have a beginning.

its very simple. If the universe has no beginning, that means it is infinitely old. Certain Natural laws, such as entropy, would render the universe unlivable if true.

Not completely true. Macroscopic entropy dose have to increase yes, but it can be violated under short time steps, and under small volume scales. We can't extrapolate beyond about 10^-30 s, and our understanding of physics brakes at 10^-43. It is precisely at this time that entropy is most likely to be completely and permanently violated.

So it is possible that our universe is infinitely old, but if the nature of entropy is found to be completely violated at certain conditions (note I only said it was likely, not definite), then it might be impossible to know what happened before t=0, because all classical information would have been destroyed. Though there might be other secondary effects at this time too.

I wonder if God wears shoes.