{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
originally posted in:Secular Sevens
8/12/2013 11:35:13 PM
1
[quote]There's nothing to refute, it's just a bunch of obvious claims which don't support why they don't believe in god.[/quote]This is the kind of thing I just recommended you *avoid*, man.
[quote]"There's no definite evidence he exists" even though the same goes to the beginning of the universe.[/quote]The Big Bang theory is a scientific theory whose truth is entirely dependent on fitting-with-observable-phenomena. Deities are not.
[quote]How can you all believe the universe started when you have no evidence or facts about it?[/quote][url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble%27s_law]Yo.[/url]
[quote]The Big Bang isn't the start by the way, just why it's expanding.[/quote]The Big Bang Theory definitely *does* deal with the start of the observable universe.
[quote]Black holes are still a science mystery but people claim they believe in what they are (even though they don't have any evidence or facts).[/quote]Depending on the amount of empirical support for the claims, those people are of varying degrees of correctness.
[quote]There are many hypocritical arguments from anyone claiming that science is needed to prove God.[/quote]Name one. That's not a smug dare; I really want to know.
English
-
-Many things were named laws or theories from observation but turned out to be false. Remember when science claimed that rotten food created maggots because they observed that maggots were always on rotten food? It had to be proven with experiments with jars that flies had to come and create the maggots. Something can't be created from nothing. -The Big Bang says how the universe was formed, not how the matter was created and started. -Claims of Big Holes are being proven false pretty much yearly now. They're just now thinking they can find equations that can apply to Black Holes but they still understand very little of what it is. It wasn't long ago that people believed it was a vacuum which sucked everything in. Our understanding of things can be too difficult for humans and that's why we can't just say God can't exist because we don't understand how he would work but we claim black holes are something that they aren't because we act like we understand them just because you can see it. -Pretty much everything we've been talking about. Science contradicts itself a lot and humans think we need science to prove everything when in reality science proves nothing because it never truly can. Science cannot explain the universe fully so why do people put full faith into it but need 100% proof of God when science can't even 85% prove many things that are around us today.
-
[quote]Many things were named laws or theories from observation but turned out to be false.[/quote]True, empirical evidence is not an absolute indicator of a truth. But that's actually an argument in favor of atheism; even if we observed a miracle that was best-explained by the Christian God, that wouldn't make him real for *certain*. [quote]Something can't be created from nothing.[/quote]Actually, I'm pretty sure it can. Causation isn't an intrinsic property of physical reality (or at least, it hasn't been shown to be). [quote]The Big Bang says how the universe was formed, not how the matter was created and started.[/quote]Matter doesn't imply creation. You indirectly invoked the "energy/matter cannot be created or destroyed" maxim in your last point, and while that's not an absolute principle (and doesn't really deal with the origin of matter), it's worth noting. Anyway, I was hoping you'd specifically break down the posts of the people I listed and directly respond to them.
-
My problem is while I might be able to debate with them, I don't think I have the time to commit to it nor the proper knowledge to fully dispute whatever scientific or philosophical arguments that they may be using.
