Creationism, the biggest troll of the internet.

FoxEye said:
I'm looking at my TV which is made of matter and uses energy. And yet its constituent parts are supposed to have emerged from nothing, because of dark matter? Which itself came about from nothing?

What about before dark matter existed? Or does dark matter technically not exist? I won't claim to even slightly understand these theories. Perhaps you do.

Atoms, quarks, dark matter, energy... no matter how we define the building blocks of our universe, don't we still face the question of how they got here?

Surely you can't split nothing into two lots of something? -something and +something?

Yes, 0 = -1 + 1. But that is just math. Math can do whatever it wants. I know I'm not explaining this very well, but just because you can write an equation doesn't mean I can take a whole lot nothing and build two TVs out of it. One dark matter TV and one normal TV...

And, erm, another thing. If you can make dark matter plus an equal amount of matter from nothing, doesn't that mean we have infinite matter and infinite energy to play with? Again, I don't understand what I'm talking about, so feel free to explain this in words I'd understand :p
Click to expand...

No, I get what you're trying to say. I don't claim to have the answers, but I'm quite comfortable stating I don't know. But let's not fall into a gods of the gap fallacy. The bible has no reasonable explanation either, unless you presuppose the bible is true and to do that you must presuppose supernaturalism is true or at least possible.
 
EVH said:
Something I've never understood about the concept of creationism though; where did God come from? How was he created?
Click to expand...

This is critical. You are presenting the argument towards god creating everything BECAUSE you don't know where the initial energy that formed the universe came from and thus god must have created it. This argument directly contradicts itself and is therefore invalid. It contradicts itself because, by your logic and mine, something must have created god in the first place.

It's important to note that just because we don't know WHY something happened, it doesn't mean that we can never find that out, and furthermore it doesn't mean that there's a supernatural force behind it. Cavemen would have explained fire with one of their gods, but that doesn't mean he created it; it's simply a lack of understanding.
 
Domo said:
Neither of which have been proven to exist so why even mention it.
Kind of ironic when you think about it.. ;)
Click to expand...

Why would they have to be proven to exist to be discussed? And I didn't claim anything existed, I prefaced my comment with a "if true". Either way, there is evidence for both dark energy matter, and some interesting theories.

I'm not sure if why you think this is ironic. Are you honestly comparing the standard model of cosmology with biblical creation stories?
 
dirtychinchilla said:
This is critical. You are presenting the argument towards god creating everything BECAUSE you don't know where the initial energy that formed the universe came from and thus god must have created it. This argument directly contradicts itself and is therefore invalid. It contradicts itself because, by your logic and mine, something must have created god in the first place.

It's important to note that just because we don't know WHY something happened, it doesn't mean that we can never find that out, and furthermore it doesn't mean that there's a supernatural force behind it. Cavemen would have explained fire with one of their gods, but that doesn't mean he created it; it's simply a lack of understanding.
Click to expand...

Are you quoting the right person? EVH isn't presenting an argument for theistic creation at all. Quite the opposite. :confused:
 
SMed said:
Why would they have to be proven to exist to be discussed? And I didn't claim anything existed, I prefaced my comment with a "if true". Either way, there is evidence for both dark energy matter, and some interesting theories.

I'm not sure if why you think this is ironic. Are you honestly comparing the standard model of cosmology with biblical creation stories?
Click to expand...

No I'm not. I'm simply pointing out the irony that neither God nor the theories you speak of have been scientifically proven to exist and yet so many believe they do. While religeous people go to church there are scientists investing entire careers in theories with nothing but other unproven theories propping them up - string theory quickly springs to mind.

Didn't dark matter only come about after it was suggested the mass of galaxies is not consistent with Newtonian physics, so something else had to give weight to a much needed solution (no pun intended :))

Anyway, my point of view is live and let live. I am open minded to be honest though I stay well clear of Creationism! All I'm trying to do here (albeit badly) is point out there's a thin line between science and religion with perhpas more overlap than most will give credit to.
 
Domo said:
No I'm not. I'm simply pointing out the irony that neither God nor the theories you speak of have been scientifically proven to exist and yet so many believe they do.
Click to expand...

argh :mad: Not this again! Nothing is ever scientifically 'proven'. Theories are scientific models that fit the observed data. Theories can be found to be false by not aligning with observed data.

A good theory is one that gives more than it takes. By this I mean that it should give more conclusions/predictions/corollaries than it takes assumptions.

Therefore a scientist working with a theory should spend time analysing the consequences of the theory in order to obtain something testable. This would provide data that either supports the theory or goes against it.

If this is what you mean by investing careers on theories, well then, err yeah. duh.
Anyway, my point of view is live and let live. I am open minded to be honest though I stay well clear of Creationism! All I'm trying to do here (albeit badly) is point out there's a thin line between science and religion with perhpas more overlap than most will give credit to.
Click to expand...
Please dont use straw man argument to prop up your theory. :mad:;)
 
EVH said:
I consider the bible a set of metaphorical stories/fables to teach people a set of principles, that got taken literally at some point.
Click to expand...



"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"

That is what people should base their ideas on, it's not a religion simply a moral code that people should attempt to live by, you don't have to be religious to agree with the moral compass described in the bible (among numerous other religious texts)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Golden_Rule

I appreciate that this may come across as preachy however i do not believe in God, however that being said there is nothing wrong with agreeing with some of the morals within the bible!
 
Newm0 said:
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"

That is what people should base their ideas on, it's not a religion simply a moral code that people should attempt to live by, you don't have to be religious to agree with the moral compass described in the bible (among numerous other religious texts)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Golden_Rule

I appreciate that this may come across as preachy however i do not believe in God, however that being said there is nothing wrong with agreeing with some of the morals within the bible!
Click to expand...

And disagreeing with a large number of them,such as slavery, subjugation of women, death to witches and homsexuals.
 
Yes exactly it's simply a set of fables that have been taken literally or as i described them during my time at catholic school.... Superman but 2000 years ago :)
 
Lucero said:
As opposed to the evolutionists who...........?
Click to expand...

I don't - I get annoyed at people with those stupid Darwin fish stickers.

I know, I'll get people who think differently than me to come around to my own point of view by deliberately mocking something about their religion that has nothing to do with creationism.

It's as pants on head retarded as continually criticising Islam for intolerance whilst continuing to draw pictures of Muhammad.
 
FoxEye said:
According to the Bible, the first humans on the planet lived for hundreds of years.

One possibility is that they were biologically superior to us, but that is far from the only explanation of why this could happen.

Suffice to say, we cannot simply bound Adam and Eve with the rules of genetics and biology from the 21st century.
Click to expand...

who mentioned anything about genetics?


We have literally no idea how they were able to live and breed successfully. The only thing we can be sure of is that they were recognisably human.
Click to expand...


Err no you can't, you can't even be sure they existed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom