benalvino2:


So you remove genesis 1:1 where it says heavens(cosmos/universe) and the earth.... so you lied when you said the earth was already there

From this your comment I have come to my conclusion that the Agnostic guy is correct, He sited valid words from your bible, and instead of you to reply with a reasonable post, you accuse him of lying, when it is clearly stated in your bible...Thank You.

cloudstar:


Proof has two meanings:

1. There's the rigorous meaning in maths that is very difficult to do and rare
2. Then there's the other meaning – beyond reasonable doubt

So, I can't mathematically or scientifically prove that God exist. However, I can provide evidence beyond reasonable doubt that He does. If you are interested, we can get started

I am pretty sure beyond reasonable doubt that the evidence you have will not meet my satisfaction. So lets not pursue an exercise in futility.

In any case my original post was about proving non existence. Not proving existence.

sufido123:


To determine my parentage: There is DNA testing


How do you know this is me? You are being fastidious, it does not matter whether is me or my sister or anyone because in this forum we are all anonymous. The bottom line is that you know you are communicating with a human being. Therefore your position is not tenable.

You can't answer a question by posing another question. I am a humanist and you asked me if there is anything that I believe in that cannot be verified. The simple answer is no. I am not superstitious and I believe in things that are verifiable including when you tell me about your God, you have to prove that he/it exists.

That leads me to a response to your assertion that when I said that there is no evidence of God, it means I claimed to know it all. I do not claim to know it all, my claim is that there is no evidence of God and you have not been able to discredit this assertion. I don't even know enough to say there is no God, my position is there is no evidence of his existence and this is a truism.

I would not be debating the physics, biology and chemistry of the world, it will do you and I no good. I do not care what you think about evolution, consciousness or energy. It is a search I am not interested in. Similarly, my interest here only relates to the evidence of God's existence. If you have any verifiable evidence of God, I would be willing to share it with you but please do not tell me the bible is your evidence because it is not.

For your assertion that other gods but Yahweh are false, you are again engaging in a conclusion you have no fact to support. You simply do not know which God is real if at all there is God. If you understand why you dismissed Zeus as God then you would understand why others dismiss Yahweh and his son. Of course you do not understand why you dismiss other gods, you have simply been brainwashed to do so

You were born an atheist and the rest of the dogma you acquired after birth were by accident of birth. I know it is difficult for you to admit that you cannot provide me with any evidence of the existence of God. The rest of your assertions though interesting are nothing but wild goose chases.

If your qwest is to discredit evolution to validate God, I say good luck in that but count me out. To me there is a possibility that both evolution and God dogma are both wrong. However, evolution makes more sense than the God delusion.

This sensible quote should have ended this argument...........if our minds have not been bastardized by unverified dogmatic beliefs

MRosario:
From this your comment I have come to my conclusion that the Agnostic guy is correct, He sited valid words from your bible, and instead of you to reply with a reasonable post, you accuse him of lying, when it is clearly stated in your bible...Thank You.

lol... you are suppose to be smart isn't it?

malvisguy212:
the amalakites are since been judge but God speared themn until they fill up there measure.

God did not wipe out the nation,The LORD said to Moses, "Write this
on a scroll as something to be
remembered and make sure that
Joshua hears it, because I will
completely blot out the memory of
Amalek from under heaven."
Moses built an altar and called it The
LORD is my Banner. He said, "For
hands were lifted up to the throne of
the LORD. The LORD will be at war
against the Amalekites from
generation to generation." ( Ex
17:14-16) "Blot out the memory of. Amalek" refers to the extinction of the descendents of Amalek. Clearly God was not referring to the world's knowledge that Amalek existed, else he would not have commanded the Amalekites' defeat to be recorded. He wanted the incidents to be remembered, so that future generations would realize that God, not the Israelites, defeated the Amalekites and avenged their unjust treatment of others.
The Amalekites presumably would have
been wiped out by Saul in 1 Samuel 15 if he had followed God's instructions. He
did destroy the city of Amalek, but other
raiding parties/nomadic bands of Amalekites survived. These were
defeated by David in 1 Samuel 30 with
the exception of a few hundred who
escaped ( 30:17). The remnant of the
Amalekites were finally destroyed by the Israelites many years later ( 1 Chr 4:43).
Thus, while God did blot out the memory of Amalek by wiping out his descendents, he was at war with them for many generations.

I don't defend God, I defend the truth, God will defend himself very soon, I assure you bro, mark my word, I Moses say this.

I laugh in spanish

benalvino2:

lol... you are suppose to be smart isn't it?

If you can believe fables written millenia's ago without valid proof, then my brother you can believe anything. And No, I am not supposing I am smart, I am putting it to you that I am smart.

MRosario:
If you can believe fables written millenia's ago without valid proof, then my brother you can believe anything. And No, I am not supposing I am smart, I am putting it to you that I am smart.

Your body is the proof... The universe is the proof

Redlyn:


I am pretty sure beyond reasonable doubt that the evidence you have will not meet my satisfaction. So lets not pursue an exercise in futility.

In any case my original post was about proving non existence. Not proving existence.

Of course it will not - that is why you are an Atheist . I appreciate your honestly though

Pr0ton

and "whatever begins to exist has a cause" so God has a cause, huh? if He doesn't then He doesn't exist as "whatever begins to exist [must] have a cause" in other words, "things that don't have a cause don't exist."

It's a cosmological argument and a logical one. A typical example is this: Before anything moves, it had to be moved by an initial force or mover. So does the mover and the mover that moved that mover. However, there can't be an eternal set of movers - at some point; there was the first cause that started everything i.e. a chain reaction that started everything or the first action that triggered the domino.

and don't tell me God never began to exist, because He's always there. Your Bible says, "in the beginning was the word" so He has a beginning. Even, pastors do call Him "the beginning and end".

However you interpret it, it's pretty simple - Before the "beginning" - there was God. Before matter and energy; something higher, some metaphysical preceded everything else - the 1st un-caused cause.

I can't get any more clearer than that.

1ord:
Fact is yaweh and his ilk are genocidal.You can try to twist the scriptures but we have all read them. They attacked many nations unprovoked either to get to their promised land or just because they had diffrent gods. Your God is a bigot.

No one is ignoring or hiding anything. I did admit there were wars and killings in the Bible especially in the Old testament. The poster said that the Hebrews attacked all other nations unprovoked and that was a huge mis-representation of the text and an out-right lie.

I do admit there were wars - no one is denying that. So, I don't understand where you are suggesting I am twisting scriptures

sufido123:


Fallacious argument period! Case closed. What type of empirical evidence are you talking about? You have none. Don't ask me to falsify your false argument, it is already false. Therefore, I can't negate a negative.

By the way I noticed that you try to evade the tough questions by creating your own questions and then answering the questions the way you like. It does not make sense.

Are you blind or are you deaf? Or you just don't know how to respond. From the above I have posted; can you please falsify it - if you can't; then sit down and shut-up.

I am asking logical questions for you to either validate or falsify and I honestly hope you know what that means. Either what I have posted above is true or it's not.

You seem to always cry wolf without offering any alternate explanation.

davien:
William lane craig has been called out on this his apologetics....why are you rehashing long debunked apologetics?
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/William_Lane_Craig

The cosmological argument didn't start with William Lane Craig my friend. It goes all the way back to Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century and it's a very strong argument. One that no Atheist here have responded to so far.

It's easy to call someone lame and saying it has been debunked when you provide a link as proof instead of addressing the argument. The link you posted said this - Not enough is known about the early stages of the Big bang or about what existed before the Big bang. We don't know what the universe was like before the first 10−43 seconds after inflation started to say with certainty that the universe had a beginning

That above statement from rational-wiki contradicts all the evidence we have today from Scientist that admit our universe did have a beginning. That is why I don't pay attention to crap written by critics do are not objective but who rather see fault with other opinions. I rather engage people scientifically or with reasonable amount of proof on such topics

cloudstar:


Are you blind or are you deaf? Or you just don't know how to respond. From the above I have posted; can you please falsify it - if you can't; then sit down and shut-up.

I am asking logical questions for you to either validate or falsify and I honestly hope you know what that means. Either what I have posted above is true or it's not.

You seem to always cry wolf without offering any alternate explanation.

You have vacillated from one fallacious argument to the other. You have used argumentum ad populum, argumentum ad baculum, devine fallacy, argumentum ignorantium, argument by gibberish, fallacy of shifting the burden of proof and you have now ended up at the grand daddy of them all which are insults called ad hominem fallacy and evil or stupid fallacy. When it gets to this point, I usually leave you in your own cesspool.

Your reasoning is fallacious and no amount of name calling would change that. Thank you for the debate.

sufido123:


You have vacillated from one fallacious argument to the other. You have used argumentum ad baculum, devine fallacy, argumentum ignorantium, argument by gibberish, fallacy of shifting the burden of proof and you have now ended up at the grand daddy of them all which are insults called ad hominem fallacy and evil or stupid fallacy. When it gets to this point, I usually leave you in your own cesspool.

Your reasoning is fallacious and no amount of name calling would change that. Thank you for the debate.

Bros, stop all the long grammar. If you can falsify what I have posted, please do - if you can't simply admit you can't.

cloudstar:
Pr0ton



It's a cosmological argument and a logical one. A typical example is this: Before anything moves, it had to be moved by an initial force or mover. So does the mover and the mover that moved that mover. However, there can't be an eternal set of movers - at some point; there was the first cause that started everything i.e. a chain reaction that started everything or the first action that triggered the domino.

The same way you aver that God is the first cause is the same way I aver that the cosmos is its first cause. Argue that the cosmos must have a cause and I'll also argue that God must a cause.

However you interpret it, it's pretty simple - Before the "beginning" - there was God. Before matter and energy; something higher, some metaphysical preceded everything else - the 1st un-caused cause.

I can't get any more clearer than that.

So tell me where in the Bible that says "before the beginning was God"

Pr0ton

The same way you aver that God is the first cause is the same way I aver that the cosmos is its first cause. Argue that the cosmos must have a cause and I'll also argue that God must a cause.

So the Cosmos created the Universe? - what is the difference between the Cosmos and the Universe by the way? Also, is the Cosmos the creator?

So tell me where in the Bible that says "before the beginning was God"

The Bible doesn't use the word "Before the beginning". So, if you are looking for the word that says - Before the beginning, God existed and then in the beginning, He created everything; you won't find that as the author didn't indicate that. In the same way, I wouldn't look at a painting in a museum and expect to see the painter birth-date on his painting to prove he existed before he painted the picture or accuse him of being a baby when he painted it. I can't argue from silence.

However, if you continue to read the passage down to verse 3 of John chapter one, it states it quite clearly that God created everything

John 1 King James Version (KJV):

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

[b][/b]Glory be to our Source for endowing us with such evolved minds!
This debate has portrayed the diversities and limitations of the intellect of homo-sapiens that ought to have attained the phase of homo-spiritus. The power of the concious mind is like a tip of the iceberg when contrasted with the sub-concious. Yet, synchronising both minds makes for spiritual development as we physically grow.
It is healthy to question previous assumptions as a rational being. But to throw away the baby with the bath-water is unacceptable. It is irresponsible to entrust the search and unification of the mind with the Absolute to agents of religion. If you want it well done, do it yourself. The good news is you have a lifetime to seek the truth. Should you choose to inquire using a forum such as this, with the spirit of genuine love and humilty, a lot can be achieved.
Every soul has it's own truth. Consequently, your view of the great spirit would be limited to your perpective. So, we need one another to get the big picture. If we disagree with book gods, then, I reckon is the beginning of the honest search for the true one. Shall we be rid of our self-serving biases, we would be able to see more clearly.

cloudstar:
Pr0ton



So the Cosmos created the Universe? - what is the difference between the Cosmos and the Universe by the way? Also, is the Cosmos the creator?

Bro, I never said there's any difference. You should know I was talking of the universe when I used cosmos.

And did God create Himself? He's His own creator? If you don't deem it weird that the God you don't see has no creator because a book tells you so how insane do you look to doubt that which you are in and do feel to have no creator even when science, the study of nature, suggests the opposite?

The Bible doesn't use the word "Before the beginning". So, if you are looking for the word that says - Before the beginning, God existed and then in the beginning, He created everything; you won't find that as the author didn't indicate that.

...they only indicate that He has a beginning and it won't be proper to add to their words, which if we did would clearly oppose their idea of God having a beginning.

In the same way, I wouldn't look at a painting in a museum and expect to see the painter birth-date on his painting to prove he existed before he painted the picture or accuse him of being a baby when he painted it. I can't argue from silence.

This post is as dumb as any post can ever be. Are you comparing a mere painting with the universe? We are talking about the creation of time and space which is possible for the painter to exist before his art since he himself is within space. Time and space started when the universe started and there can't be any time and space before the universe, and that gives the impossibility of the existence of your God before the universe.

However, if you continue to read the passage down to verse 3 of John chapter one, it states it quite clearly that God created everything

John 1 King James Version (KJV):

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

but the verse one states he was in the beginning and not before the beginning showing it clearly that the author didn't even understand Cosmology to begin with.

Pr0ton:


and "whatever begins to exist has a cause" so God has a cause, huh?

if He doesn't then He doesn't exist as "whatever begins to exist [must] have a cause" in other words, "things that don't have a cause don't exist."

and don't tell me God never began to exist, because He's always there. Your Bible says, "in the beginning was the word" so He has a beginning. Even, pastors do call Him "the beginning and end".

Before I leave this thread, I would pray for those who are chasing shadows regarding Yahweh that since they love him so much and he exists, they will go and meet him this 2015. Please do not call this a curse It is helping these guys fulfill their wishes.

Pr0ton

Bro, I never said there's any difference. You should know I was talking of the universe when I used cosmos.

Thanks for clearing it up. So the question again is - Did the Universe create itself? Is the Universe the creator or everything?

And did God create Himself? He's His own creator? If you don't deem it weird that the God you don't see has no creator because a book tells you so how insane do you look to doubt that which you are in and do feel to have no creator even when science, the study of nature, suggests the opposite?

The common school boy argument . The God that I am explaining is not a created being. The Christian God is and was not created. If your idea of god is like that of Zeus or their likes that were products of matter or energy of the children of other gods, then you have the concept of the Christian God confused. God is eternal - that is one of His attributes or characteristics. Furthermore, for God to create anything he had to already exist in order to perform the action. But he could not do anything if he did not exist. Therefore, it is not possible for God to create himself.

There are people that call themselves gods and we have a place for such people - the mental hospital. So, if you think you are demolishing the question of created gods then good for you. You would have saved yourself the time because Christians don't need any convincing that created gods are a delusion . Let's use some math here to break it down for you:

1. The Christian God is un-created!
2. The category of the un-created is not empty

Perhaps, you have difficulty with the notion of the un-created. Christians do not. Also, do you believe that matter and energy existed before the creation of the universe? In essence, do you believe that they are eternal or were eternal? Or do you believe they were finite?

To my my painter example again, it's similar to you asking - who painted the painter since the painter existed before the painting? The painter existed before he painted the painting in question and it was at the time that the painting came into existence.

Imagine you wrote a book, the book never existed until you wrote it. We all agree that the book never existed and only existed at the time you wrote it and published it. Now, to find out who wrote the book; will I ask - "Who wrote the author?" Or even if we don't have any confirmation on who exactly wrote the book - will I ask "Did the author write himself?". This is a common Atheist question that have been amplified by the likes of Richard Darwkins, Lawrence Kruss and Sam Harris but it's so shallow that everyone can see through it.

The Christian God is not bound by time or space or was created; any Christian will tell you that. Also, I don't believe only because the Bible said so but because the information we have now point to an intelligent designer as the originator of our Universe - I called that intelligent designer God. Atheist don't like to call it God; that is fine by me. However, there is no entity that fits such description or has the power to create matter and energy and life.

...they only indicate that He has a beginning and it won't be proper to add to their words, which if we did would clearly oppose their idea of God having a beginning.

You are arguing from incomplete reference - you are cherry picking one statement without reading the entire text. If you read the entire text, it makes it clear that God created everything. The Bible also makes it very clear that God is eternal; so your argument that the Bible didn't use "Before the Beginning" has too many holes in it

This post is as dumb as any post can ever be. Are you comparing a mere painting with the universe? We are talking about the creation of time and space which is possible for the painter to exist before his art since he himself is within space. Time and space started when the universe started and there can't be any time and space before the universe, and that gives the impossibility of the existence of your God before the universe.

Christian authors and Christians all know that God is eternal and existed before the beginning. If you want verses that state "Before", I will happily indulge you:

1. No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. (1 Corinthians 2:7)
2. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time (2 Timothy 1:9)
3. The hope of eternal life, which God... promised before the beginning of time (Titus 1:2)
4. To the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen. (Jude 1:25)

Again, it's quite clear in the Bible that God existed before time - please try and open your eyes when you read this. It's important that you are objective.

but the verse one states he was in the beginning and not before the beginning showing it clearly that the author didn't even understand Cosmology to begin with.

I admitted that the particular verse started with "In the beginning" and not "Before the beginning". However, the full text shows that God created everything and I have demonstrated above with Biblical references showing you that God is eternal and existed before the beginning.

cloudstar:
Pr0ton



Thanks for clearing it up. So the question again is - Did the Universe create itself? Is the Universe the creator or everything?

With no other observable alternative, we can conclude that it did.

The common school boy argument . The God that I am explaining is not a created being. The Christian God is and was not created. If your idea of god is like that of Zeus or their likes that were products of matter or energy of the children of other gods, then you have the concept of the Christian God confused. God is eternal - that is one of His attributes or characteristics. Furthermore, for God to create anything he had to already exist in order to perform the action. But he could not do anything if he did not exist. Therefore, it is not possible for God to create himself.

There are people that call themselves gods and we have a place for such people - the mental hospital. So, if you think you are demolishing the question of created gods then good for you. You would have saved yourself the time because Christians don't need any convincing that created gods are a delusion . Let's use some math here to break it down for you:

1. The Christian God is un-created!
2. The category of the un-created is not empty

Perhaps, you have difficulty with the notion of the un-created. Christians do not. Also, do you believe that matter and energy existed before the creation of the universe? In essence, do you believe that they are eternal or were eternal? Or do you believe they were finite?

To my my painter example again, it's similar to you asking - who painted the painter since the painter existed before the painting? The painter existed before he painted the painting in question and it was at the time that the painting came into existence.

Imagine you wrote a book, the book never existed until you wrote it. We all agree that the book never existed and only existed at the time you wrote it and published it. Now, to find out who wrote the book; will I ask - "Who wrote the author?" Or even if we don't have any confirmation on who exactly wrote the book - will I ask "Did the author write himself?". This is a common Atheist question that have been amplified by the likes of Richard Darwkins, Lawrence Kruss and Sam Harris but it's so shallow that everyone can see through it.

The Christian God is not bound by time or space or was created; any Christian will tell you that. Also, I don't believe only because the Bible said so but because the information we have now point to an intelligent designer as the originator of our Universe - I called that intelligent designer God. Atheist don't like to call it God; that is fine by me. However, there is no entity that fits such description or has the power to create matter and energy and life.

How can anything exist outside time and space?? There was no time and space before the universe began, with that, it can be said to be eternal.

Even if there was any intelligent designer it can't be your God because it doesn't have features you attribute to your God. It doesn't connect to us. It only made the "first cause".

You are arguing from incomplete reference - you are cherry picking one statement without reading the entire text. If you read the entire text, it makes it clear that God created everything. The Bible also makes it very clear that God is eternal; so your argument that the Bible didn't use "Before the Beginning" has too many holes in it

What I'm I cherry picking? I stated what your Bible states that your God has a beginning. And maybe after He began to exist He started creating things. But one thing is He has a beginning which is no different from the universe.

Christian authors and Christians all know that God is eternal and existed before the beginning. If you want verses that state "Before", I will happily indulge you:

1. No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. (1 Corinthians 2:7)
2. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time (2 Timothy 1:9)
3. The hope of eternal life, which God... promised before the beginning of time (Titus 1:2)
4. To the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen. (Jude 1:25)

Again, it's quite clear in the Bible that God existed before time - please try and open your eyes when you read this. It's important that you are objective.



I admitted that the particular verse started with "In the beginning" and not "Before the beginning". However, the full text shows that God created everything and I have demonstrated above with Biblical references showing you that God is eternal and existed before the beginning.

It is not uncommon for the Bible to contradict itself. Where one place states "in the beginning" another place will tell you a different thing. It'd lead to nowhere if I started quoting out verses that contradict those up there.

It is also not uncommon for the Bible to make scientific errors, like the assertion that anything can exist outside time and space.

Now if all you'll keep doing is swallowing up apologetics lies and errors and coming here to vomit them for me to clean... I'm done with you.

asalimpo:


That's how all christian deal with God,thru faith, reason comes later.
Factual evidence comes later.
God's word is d agency of faith, but you unbelieving folks ,one day every man will hav no excuse , faith will b done away with but you moronic guyz, atheists so called, it will b toooooooo late for ya. You'll b screaming and begging to be given another chance to believe in God but you won't be given.

You suffer from the God delusion.

benalvino2:


Too bad we are not on the dimensions... we are talking about the attributes both has.... when you say circle you are talking about a round object and when you talk about sphere you are talking about round object... get that into your skull

If sphere is round and the bible says the earth is round what's the problem?

When did mathematicians come up with the word sphere to describe 3d circles?
On paper the earth is always 2d therefore a circle... in reality its 3d a sphere which is a 3d circle.

OHH my God are you a r.et.a.rd. You are seriously defending your stupidity. Its like saying a square and a cube are the same. Like you are a special type of st.upi.d.

1ord:
OHH my God are you a r.et.a.rd. You are seriously defending your stupidity. Its like saying a square and a cube are the same. Like you are a special type of st.upi.d.

am sorry you got no excuse... there is no way you can counter what I just taught you.. I know you learnt something but the shame in you is what made you call me re tar d. the earth is round = fact. sphere is round = fact. except you want to say sphere is not round STFU

maybe this should help you.
http://www.universetoday.com/26782/why-is-the-earth-round/

A sphere (from Greek σφαῖρα — sphaira, "globe, ball"[1]) is a perfectly round geometrical and circular object in three-dimensional space that resembles the shape of a completely round ball. Like a [size=18pt]circle[/size], which, in geometric contexts, is in [size=18pt]two dimensions[/size], a sphere is defined mathematically as the set of points that are all the same distance r from a given point in three-dimensional space. This distance r is the radius of the sphere, and the given point is the center of the sphere. The maximum straight distance through the sphere passes through the center and is thus twice the radius; it is the diameter.

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

1ord you are a goat

1ord:
OHH my God are you a r.et.a.rd. You are seriously defending your stupidity. Its like saying a square and a cube are the same. Like you are a special type of st.upi.d.

well you don't know how math works then.

cube is a 6face squares... so when a square is 3dimensional it becomes a cube...

1ord:
OHH my God are you a r.et.a.rd. You are seriously defending your stupidity. Its like saying a square and a cube are the same. Like you are a special type of st.upi.d.

It's best to leave him be, you can't keep going in circles for someone who doesn't even know what a single point mass is..

davien:
It's best to leave him be, you can't keep going in circles for someone who doesn't even know what a single point mass is..

yeah exactly... I showed him how foolish he is to say someone describing the earth as round object... then you came with your own stupidity again... how about you prove to me that a sphere is not round? or is it another way to accept defeat? just insult someone.

benalvino2:


yeah exactly... I showed him how foolish he is to say someone describing the earth as round object... then you came with your own stupidity again... how about you prove to me that a sphere is not round? or is it another way to accept defeat? just insult someone.

The irony here is you keep accusing people of exactly what you're doing....and do I owe you any burden of proof regarding the earth?

davien:
The irony here is you keep accusing people of exactly what you're doing....and do I owe you any burden of proof regarding the earth?

can you prove to me that a sphere is not round? if you can't please shut up... I only call him and you names because that's what you guys have been doing. unless you can prove that a ball or globe or sphere is not round STFU

benalvino2:


am sorry you got no excuse... there is no way you can counter what I just taught you.. I know you learnt something but the shame in you is what made you call me re tar d. the earth is round = fact. sphere is round = fact. except you want to say sphere is not round STFU

maybe this should help you.
http://www.universetoday.com/26782/why-is-the-earth-round/

So My good friend is this a credible source? The website clearly doesnt know what dafuq they are doing cause they clearly used round to define the earth.