Need help disproving GOD

Discussions about the possibility of consciousness, free will, spirits, deities, religions and so on, and how these might interact with time travel, the Big Bang, many worlds and so on.

Need help disproving GOD

Postby Universally_thinking » Tue Apr 24, 2007 5:00 pm

ok, some religeous "nuts" are giving points that evolution is fake and i need people to help me answer back.

link is here

http://nexgenwars.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6563
Universally_thinking
Dionian
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: UK

Postby Nick » Tue Apr 24, 2007 7:32 pm

I would stay from away from that debate if I were you; you will get lots of ignorant people who don't know anything. I read the first two pages, and already I'm scarred for life ;) .

But if you insist:
Theories are ideas that explain a set of facts. Evolution Theory is called a theory not because it has no evidence, but because it explains how we came to be. Nothing in science can ever be truly be proven. However, Evolution Theory (along with Einstein's Theory of Relativity, Quantum Theory, and Atomic Theory) has acquired so much evidence that nearly every scientist in the world acknowledges it as fact and uses it as a fact that other theories can use to explain more stuff.

Also, no one says that life came from rocks magically. Carbon, Nitrogen, Hydrogen and Oxygen are the elements that make up all of life. When smashed together, with enough force, they can create a protein, the more complex building blocks of life. Scientists hypothesize that the force was acquired during the time of the Earth's history when lots of meteors hit it. LOTS of meteors.
I am the Nick formerly known as irockyou.
postcount++;
"All evidence of truth comes only from the senses" - Friedrich Nietzsche

Image
Nick
Tetronian
 
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 8:47 pm
Location: New Jersey, USA

Postby houserichichi » Wed Apr 25, 2007 1:52 pm

Creationism and evolution are not even talking about the same thing. Creationism dictates where things come from via a supernatural entity. Evolution explains what happens AFTER such things are already created.
houserichichi
Tetronian
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 1:03 am
Location: Canada

Postby Nick » Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:24 pm

houserichichi wrote:Creationism and evolution are not even talking about the same thing. Creationism dictates where things come from via a supernatural entity. Evolution explains what happens AFTER such things are already created.


I think they're discussing that as well. But whatever.
I am the Nick formerly known as irockyou.
postcount++;
"All evidence of truth comes only from the senses" - Friedrich Nietzsche

Image
Nick
Tetronian
 
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 8:47 pm
Location: New Jersey, USA

Evolution

Postby jbronson » Fri May 11, 2007 4:51 am

At the begining of the theory of evolution, as i have been taught, it does not specify how the cells came about. Is this due to the molecules ordering themselves? I mean, matter can neither be created, nor destroyed right?
How could you say you hear everything I say?... If your hearing only resides upon your knowledge. --Myself
jbronson
Dionian
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:43 am

Postby PWrong » Fri May 11, 2007 9:47 am

I mean, matter can neither be created, nor destroyed right?

Where did you get that idea? :P
User avatar
PWrong
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1599
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2004 8:21 am
Location: Perth, Australia

Postby jbronson » Fri May 11, 2007 3:10 pm

My hon. Chemestry teacher told it to us. It is Lavoisiers Law but it says in a chemical reaction, matter is neither created nor destroyed. I understand that that is in a chemical reaction, but im saying does matter just pop out of nowhere?
How could you say you hear everything I say?... If your hearing only resides upon your knowledge. --Myself
jbronson
Dionian
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:43 am

Postby Keiji » Fri May 11, 2007 3:44 pm

PWrong was being sarcastic. Of course matter can't be created or destroyed.
User avatar
Keiji
Administrator
 
Posts: 1962
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2003 6:33 pm
Location: Torquay, England

Postby jbronson » Fri May 11, 2007 3:51 pm

Oic, hence the smiley face. Im not good with sarcasm on the computer.



does my question, the original one, the one about the begining of evolution, have an answer? I will rephrase the question....

Where did the first cells that began to evolve come from.
How could you say you hear everything I say?... If your hearing only resides upon your knowledge. --Myself
jbronson
Dionian
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:43 am

Postby Nick » Fri May 11, 2007 10:01 pm

jbronson wrote:Oic, hence the smiley face. Im not good with sarcasm on the computer.


Don't worry about it, neither am I :D .


does my question, the original one, the one about the begining of evolution, have an answer? I will rephrase the question....

Where did the first cells that began to evolve come from.


I don't know or care enough about biology to wonder what cells are made of, but the physics part of me says it all boils down to pure energy, and that everything was created from that using reactions of some kind. But that's speculation.
I am the Nick formerly known as irockyou.
postcount++;
"All evidence of truth comes only from the senses" - Friedrich Nietzsche

Image
Nick
Tetronian
 
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 8:47 pm
Location: New Jersey, USA

Postby moonlord » Sat May 12, 2007 7:00 pm

The research centre in my school managed to create basic amino acids in lab conditions recreating the Earth some time ago. All it took was Oxygen, Nitrogen, Hydrogen, Carbon and Electricity. In sufficient quantities, these amino acids merge and form proteins (this has yet only been proven in the area of research surrounding Folding@Home, but research is fast-paced in this area). Several proteins can merge and form macromolecules that can reproduce themselves.

A Romanian physics professor got his Ph.D. last year for a research on plasma formations that can reproduce and arrange themselves. It is still under debate if these forms should be considered life forms or not. Perhaps there will arise a rigurous definition of life.
Last edited by moonlord on Sun May 13, 2007 6:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
"God does not play dice." -- Albert Einstein, early 1900's.
"Not only does God play dice, but... he sometimes throws them where we cannot see them." -- Stephen Hawking, late 1900's.
moonlord
Tetronian
 
Posts: 605
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:01 pm
Location: CT, RO, CE EU

Postby houserichichi » Sun May 13, 2007 2:31 am

Where did the first cells come from? Well what are cells made up of? Constituent molecules that are made up of constituent atoms which are made up of constituent elementary particles like electrons and the innards of the nucleus along with force carrier particles like the photon and gluons. All one needs is a simple cooling of the universe for quarks to bind to eachother, transfer gluons, pions, leptons, and electrons to start playing around with eachother to build up some electromagnetic forces, whereby atoms will begin to form naturally which will build and grow (as the universe cools) to heavier atoms which will form larger molecules through photon exchange and chemical processes which will ultimately build and connect into cells and ultimately life over the course of billions of years.

I'm open to conversation on this topic though.
houserichichi
Tetronian
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 1:03 am
Location: Canada

Postby jbronson » Wed May 23, 2007 3:20 pm

so the theory that states that "cells only come from other cells" is incorrect?
How could you say you hear everything I say?... If your hearing only resides upon your knowledge. --Myself
jbronson
Dionian
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:43 am

Postby houserichichi » Wed May 23, 2007 3:39 pm

I was only referring to the "first" cells. After they're created then biological theories come into play, but before that case it must necessarily be that something more primitive would have occured and, as far as I can tell, the order I gave is more or less how it would have come to pass.
houserichichi
Tetronian
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 1:03 am
Location: Canada

Postby RQ » Fri Sep 14, 2007 5:52 am

moonlord wrote:The research centre in my school managed to create basic amino acids in lab conditions recreating the Earth some time ago. All it took was Oxygen, Nitrogen, Hydrogen, Carbon and Electricity. In sufficient quantities, these amino acids merge and form proteins (this has yet only been proven in the area of research surrounding Folding@Home, but research is fast-paced in this area). Several proteins can merge and form macromolecules that can reproduce themselves.

A Romanian physics professor got his Ph.D. last year for a research on plasma formations that can reproduce and arrange themselves. It is still under debate if these forms should be considered life forms or not. Perhaps there will arise a rigurous definition of life.


The proteins that can be formed in nature are incompatible with life (as we have it) because they have both "left" and "right" amino acids, whereas you need a pure "left" or "right" protein.
California State University Northridge
Biology Major
RQ
Tetronian
 
Posts: 432
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 5:07 pm
Location: Studio City, California

Re: Need help disproving GOD

Postby Lumencha » Sat Aug 02, 2008 5:05 pm

First objective is to define what you mean by "GOD". If you define GOD as a white haired guy in the clouds who is a "person" and is all powerful then I think you would have a case that this isn't real.

However if "GOD" is Universal Cosmic Consciousness then it might make more sense.

In this case evolution is not against GOD at all. Geological records prove that evolution DID happen over the history of the Earth. So how does GOD fit into this? Universal Infinite Consciousness becomes/became individualized and is playing the parts of entities in the cosmic "movie". As an individualized soul evolves and becomes more self aware it needs more and more advanced nervous systems in which to express itself. Hence evolution. So for example a cat's soul operates well in a cat's level of brain/nervous system but would not operate effectively in a human nervous system. The analogy is that of a driver driving a car. The soul is the driver and the body/brain is the car.
Lumencha
Nullonian
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 4:45 pm

Re: Need help disproving GOD

Postby wehavemoreltd » Fri Nov 07, 2008 4:44 pm

you know what , your asking dumb question? all your question dont ask anything about god? your is more , where didthe cells comes from! ask a real question ,that is a real challenge, the main question your really are asking is ( what is life?)am i right , think about it , that really what your asking when you ask your question . you should just accept whatever4 answer you have in your mind!
wehavemoreltd
Mononian
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 4:17 pm

Re: Need help disproving GOD

Postby ubersketch » Mon Dec 11, 2017 9:48 pm

Universally_thinking wrote:ok, some religeous "nuts" are giving points that evolution is fake and i need people to help me answer back.

link is here

http://nexgenwars.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6563

Disproving that god exists won't even help them believe that creationism is false. Sure, it might push them, but many religious people are evolutionists and believe god is a more passive being, only meddling slightly in physical affairs.
Also you can't disprove god exists, that would be a philosophical impossibility.
User avatar
ubersketch
Trionian
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 12:00 am

Re: Need help disproving GOD

Postby wendy » Tue Dec 12, 2017 9:18 am

My usual line of attack here is to suppose that god fills an anthropological need, in the same way that kings fill an anthropological need. This need is that to prevent something happening, it must be either against the will of nature (ie physically impossible), or offends the king (ie illegal), or offends the gods (ie immoral). But since the king does not dictate who created the world etc, since law is a matter of what is at the time, it is left to the religion to do this. Mind you, it does not matter if the religion gets the deep past wrong, simply because it stops a lot of people asking silly questions.

But you can see from this argument that kings and gods are wrought of Man, then the whole creation stuff falls apart as people misreading the pre-amble to the story.
The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1813
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Need help disproving GOD

Postby ubersketch » Sun Dec 24, 2017 2:15 pm

wendy wrote:My usual line of attack here is to suppose that god fills an anthropological need, in the same way that kings fill an anthropological need. This need is that to prevent something happening, it must be either against the will of nature (ie physically impossible), or offends the king (ie illegal), or offends the gods (ie immoral). But since the king does not dictate who created the world etc, since law is a matter of what is at the time, it is left to the religion to do this. Mind you, it does not matter if the religion gets the deep past wrong, simply because it stops a lot of people asking silly questions.

But you can see from this argument that kings and gods are wrought of Man, then the whole creation stuff falls apart as people misreading the pre-amble to the story.

I do believe there may be a higher entity, more powerful than nature, but it is entirely possible this entity is not conscious or at least sentient or sapient.
User avatar
ubersketch
Trionian
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 12:00 am


Return to Consciousness

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest