• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Top scientists comment on their research into God and aliens

American said:
BOOM! You just blew the atheists argument right out of the water. The scientific rigor applied to the belief in God by atheists is never applied to any other ancient belief. Those who once believed the earth was flat later discovered it wasn't. Atheists never measure the belief in God on the same grounds as any other ancient belief. All the information about God exists in ancient writings, and therefore must be measured on the same standard of other ancient writings. The discussion of God is probably the most talked about subject in history, yet no one really knows what God is exactly. If you don't know what to look for, how do you know how to find it. Atheist don't believe the known information about God, but want to depend on the scientific method to find God. Well we once could not see microbes, just as we can't see God now. They have no clue where to look or how; so they blow off the existence of God as myth. They don't consider their flawed or insufficient method as the problem, because our science has always been perfect, right?
Click to expand...

LOL.

Science can’t prove Frodo doesn’t exist either.

It doesn’t mean science is wrong. It means ‘proving’ the existence of a fictional character is not possible.

Substitute ‘Zeus’ or ‘Odin’ or ‘Flying Spaghetti Monster’ for ‘God’ in your post above and read it again.
 
marke said:
Logic compels all humans to believe by faith that something came from nothing, if they believe anything at all about how matter and energy originated.
Click to expand...

Not at all. logic does no such thing as what you are saying is not logical.

You are misusing logic by using a god of gaps fallacy.

The correct logical assumption is that if we do not know something then do not make up an imaginary god to answer it.
 
Threegoofs said:
LOL.

Science can’t prove Frodo doesn’t exist either.

It doesn’t mean science is wrong. It means ‘proving’ the existence of a fictional character is not possible.

Substitute ‘Zeus’ or ‘Odin’ or ‘Flying Spaghetti Monster’ for ‘God’ in your post above and read it again.
Click to expand...

When were black holes discovered? Did the theory of them exist prior to seeing one? How smart are we about them?
 
American said:
When were black holes discovered? Did the theory of them exist prior to seeing one? How smart are we about them?
Click to expand...

What’s your point?

That things out there are undiscovered?

That’s certainly true, but things that are carefully described in fiction don’t ever turn out to be real.
 
Threegoofs said:
LOL.

Science can’t prove Frodo doesn’t exist either.

It doesn’t mean science is wrong. It means ‘proving’ the existence of a fictional character is not possible.

Substitute ‘Zeus’ or ‘Odin’ or ‘Flying Spaghetti Monster’ for ‘God’ in your post above and read it again.
Click to expand...

The existence of life and matter proves there were forces at work which science cannot measure or explain, much less prove were involved. It does not matter which theoretical source one believes, it is not proven by science and must be accepted as unproven speculation.
 
soylentgreen said:
Not at all. logic does no such thing as what you are saying is not logical.

You are misusing logic by using a god of gaps fallacy.

The correct logical assumption is that if we do not know something then do not make up an imaginary god to answer it.
Click to expand...

I am not saying the fact of the origin of life and matter proves God. I'm saying it proves nothing that can be measured or observed in the lab. Where did the matter come from which filled the universe? Science does not know. We are left to speculate, and speculation does not eliminate God as a possibility.
 
marke said:
I am not saying the fact of the origin of life and matter proves God. I'm saying it proves nothing that can be measured or observed in the lab. Where did the matter come from which filled the universe? Science does not know. We are left to speculate, and speculation does not eliminate God as a possibility.
Click to expand...

It doesn't eliminate Santa as a possibility either. The possibilities are endless. Why the fascination with this particular cultural mythology as a possibility? Could it be just because you happened to grow up with it and have a particular attachment to it?
 
marke said:
The existence of life and matter proves there were forces at work which science cannot measure or explain, much less prove were involved. It does not matter which theoretical source one believes, it is not proven by science and must be accepted as unproven speculation.
Click to expand...

In other words, the divine nature of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and Jesus are basically equal. All unproven speculation.
 
marke said:
Let's ask someone who thinks like Hawking:

Are aliens an acceptable scientific possibility? I would have to assume he would reply, 'Yes aliens are a scientific possibility.'

Let's ask another scientist: Is God an acceptable scientific possibility? What if the scientist responds, "Yes, God is an acceptable scientific possibility." Is God therefore a scientific possibility?
Click to expand...

I see false equivalency even rears its ugly head in discussions about aliens and god.

hawking was saying that the "numbers" - the size and scale of the universe make the existence of aliens a rational speculation.

God is a supernatural being that defies definition, numbers and reality as we know it. Nothing suggests its existence except our profound ignorance and spiritual needs.
 
Threegoofs said:
LOL.

Science can’t prove Frodo doesn’t exist either.

It doesn’t mean science is wrong. It means ‘proving’ the existence of a fictional character is not possible.

Substitute ‘Zeus’ or ‘Odin’ or ‘Flying Spaghetti Monster’ for ‘God’ in your post above and read it again.
Click to expand...

We don't have to, because Frodo Biden ID'ed himself when he told the story of Corn Pop.
 
marke said:
He thinks humans and pigs are cousins. What a moron.
Click to expand...

Dawkins made no such claim.

As it happens, humans and pigs are close enough for transplants. We smell like roast pork when burnt, and cannibals call human meat "long pig"
 
Manc Skipper said:
Dawkins made no such claim.

As it happens, humans and pigs are close enough for transplants. We smell like roast pork when burnt, and cannibals call human meat "long pig"
Click to expand...

Dawkins only believes that because Darwin was an animal.

OIPUUFUJ3RP.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
marke said:
I am not saying the fact of the origin of life and matter proves God. I'm saying it proves nothing that can be measured or observed in the lab. Where did the matter come from which filled the universe? Science does not know. We are left to speculate, and speculation does not eliminate God as a possibility.
Click to expand...

The matter was created by the energy released at the start that's basic physics. Again you demonstrate a lack of education about the theory. You really need to understand it before you dismiss it.
 
marke said:
That is a total misunderstanding of the results of the Miller-Urey experiment.



Miller and Urey proved chemicals are as dumb and unmotivated as dirt. Some intelligent force must be involved, first to make the chemicals and then put them together in meaningful ways.



Nothing is made up. Science has proven the most basic living cells must have millions of proteins in precise combinations to form the DNA pairs necessary for life.



Ignorance assumes Vacuum + nothing + chance = origin of the universe.
Click to expand...

The volcano is not intelligent. Do you agree?
 
marke said:
Let's assume chemistry has no brains, Let's assume it has no arms or hands. Let's assume chemistry cannot move mountains or piece chemicals together for form living creatures. How then can chemistry form original matter and energy from nothing?
Click to expand...

I have no idea what you are getting at here. Chemistry is chemistry. It doesn't need a brain. Hydrogen combines with oxygen to form water. It doesn't need intelligence to do that.

If the right chemical components are present, those amino acids will form.

Chemistry doesn't do anything "from nothing," another weird bit of nonsense you're spewing.
 
marke said:
Darwin started that crap about humans being apes, but I don't believe it for a minute.
Click to expand...

Oh look, the guy rejecting science also posts racist white supremacist garbage. I'm shocked.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom