theEYe21:
Who's this mugu? Science contradicts most things in the bible.

HCpaul:
I love it when religious fanatics are trying to associate science with religion. All the rapid and progressive development achieved in science are part of evolution itself.
But did you know that Science is a superset of religion while religion is just an aspect of philosophy.

If you are not ignorant of what scientific theories entails, you will realize that beliefs and other religious theories are discarded.
You can't be a science genius and retain the standard of a real Christian. Science and Religion are two different things.

Africans are the only setback that the world has.
The whites presented us Education, Religion, Civilization, Science and Technology, but among all these, Nigerians only anticipated Religion so as to easily hide their ignorance and assumptions.
Everything about Africans have been lame, irrational and apparently not worthy of emulation.

Bro! We don't create value for our lives when we don't know and we are not ready to know.

We are the most religious but still unable to control our economy. What a religious jugi - jugi.

HCpaul:
I love it when religious fanatics are trying to associate science with religion. All the rapid and progressive development achieved in science are part of evolution itself.
But did you know that Science is a superset of religion while religion is just an aspect of philosophy.

If you are not ignorant of what scientific theories entails, you will realize that beliefs and other religious theories are discarded.
You can't be a science genius and retain the standard of a real Christian. Science and Religion are two different things.

Africans are the only setback that the world has.
The whites presented us Education, Religion, Civilization, Science and Technology, but among all these, Nigerians only anticipated Religion so as to easily hide their ignorance and assumptions.
Everything about Africans have been lame, irrational and apparently not worthy of emulation.

Bro! We don't create value for our lives when we don't know and we are not ready to know.

We are the most religious but still unable to control our economy. What a religious jugi - jugi.

blueAgent:

Does Science agree with Bible facts or that of Evolution?
Most Atheists argue that Bible facts like the Creation,are inconsistent with Scientic views.hence they promote Evolution as the Logical answer, to explain the Origin of Man.
My purpose is to verify if this Claims are consistent with Science or if Science agrees more with the Bible.

1.Origin of the Universe and Matter.
Bigbang theory says the Universe came into existence, as a result of a massive explosions ,but this contractdicts Newtons first law of motion. Which states that a body will remain in its state of rest or remain on a straight line if in motion unless it is acted upon by a force.

it also contractdicts science law which states Matter can neither be created or destoryed.

for bigbang to occur someone(God) or a force must first create the object that exploded and also provide the force to intiate the explosions.this force its self must have the ability to exert force without itsself ,requiring force  and also have the ability to create matter from nothing.

Bible answer.
Hebrews11:3 Says God spoke the word and formed the Universe from Nothing .
God is the Unmovable mover, he created the entire Universe from nothing.
This is consistent with the laws of Science i mentioned above.it requires faith to believe in the Bible ,same way bigbang theory requires faith.

2.Origin of Life:Evolution and bigbang cannot explain the origin of life.life cannot originate from lightening or by chance as suggested by atheists.

atheists view about origin of life contracdicts science law of  Biogenesis, that states all life can only come from pre-existing life.

Bible Answer:
The Bible in John  5:26 says For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;

In Job  33:4 Says "The spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life"  Life Requires a LIFEGIVER.it is
impossible to have life without a lifegiver?Only God has Life inherent in Himself. This
is, after all, what makes Him God. No one created God, because He has Life inherent in
Himself.   The  Bible also  states that God created all life during the first six days of the creation week of Genesis 1.

3.Orderliness in the Universe:Evolution and Bigbang theory suggests orderliness in the Universe came into existence by chance or by action of forces like gravity on the Universe.
They believe that Man is responsible for the destruction of the Earth rather than Sin.they believe that random events led to the orderliness in the Universe.

This contractdict The second law of thermodynamics which
proves that organization cannot flow from chaos. Complex live organisms cannot rearrange themselves into an organism of
a higher form as claimed by evolutionists.

This is scientifically backwards according
to the second law of thermodynamics,
which has never been proven wrong.The universe is slowing down.

Climate change,Flooding,Famines,Droughts,Frequent Earthquakes .e.t.c are proofs that the World is becoming more Chaotic.

Order will always move
naturally towards disorder or chaos, Not the Opposite.Our complex universe is
wearing down, and becoming more chaotic...

Bible Answer:
Paul was aware of this when he wrote his letter to the Hebrews:
Everything ".. waxes old like a garment" (quoted
in both Psalm 102:25-27, and also Hebrews
1:10-12).
"This verse "anticipates the famous second law of
thermodynamics, or law of entropy, indicating
that everything in the physical universe is
growing old and wearing out. God created
everything in the beginning, winding it up like a great clock, so to speak. Because of sin and the curse, however, it has been running down and "perishing" ever since. Jesus also said: "Heaven and earth shall pass away" (literally, "are passing away" (Matthew 24:35)" - Waxing Old, like a Garment.
Isaiah  24:4 Says"The earth mourneth and fadeth away, the world languisheth and fadeth away, the haughty people of the earth do languish"
Verse5
Isaiah  24:5 The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant.
Verse6
Isaiah  24:6 Therefore hath the curse devoured the earth, and they that dwell therein are desolate: therefore the inhabitants of the earth are burned, and few men left.
A chaotic process can never led to an organised state on its own.

4.Design: It is Obvious that the entire Universe and Human body are a product of design.Evolutionists believe the Universe came into existence by chance.

What is Chance? Chance is something to occur unexpected or unplanned.this contradicts Scientific method which is the very foundation of Scientific Research.Scientific laws or principle is established only after the theory has been proven.those laws are based on observed and proven patterns not chances.Their is no way a Man will have a Penis and a woman will have a vigina by chance and yet they complement each other ,or how will a man produce sperms and concidentally or by chance a woman also has a womb that needs that sperm to procreate.

Birds have wings to enable them fly

,Fishes have fins and gills to enable them Live in water.

the body of both fishes and birds are streamlined to enable them move in water and Air with less frictional resistance.

all this can not be by chance they were designed to be this way.

infact Science have adopted the shapes of birds and fishes in the design of Airplanes and Submarines.

Evolution can not do this. this requires design and design requires a mind and life.

Evolution is a process just like burning,farting.e.t.c they lack thought.

Bible Answer
In Psalms  139:14, it says , I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.
This shows that Man and the Universe was carefully designed and made not by chance but by God Almighty.where is the logic in believing, that Robots must be designed and created ,while Man came into existence by chance.

5.Death and Decay:
Evolution and Bigbang theory suggests that objects or things move from simple cells or things to complex things or organism .they suggest that man and the Universe is evoluing into higher state. This is contray to the law of Entropy,
The genes of plants,insects, animals, and humans are continually becoming defective, not improving. Species are becoming extinct, not evolving .

Scientific observation of the world confirms that there is an inexorable law that
things decay from more complex forms into
simpler ones over time.  Radioactive elements decay into simpler elements over time. A car or house left to itself will decay over time back
into the earth from which its constituent elements came. A recent cable-TV
documentary called “Life After Humans”
affirmed and described this process very
well. It asserted that within hundreds of
years, even New York City would be reclaimed by the elements. Streets, buildings,
metallic objects, etc. would all decay into
simpler forms. rends don’t exist.Humans and animals decay immedately after death.
In order for evolution to exist,
there would have to be an immutable,observable law that simple things automatically and inexorably recombine
themselves into ever-more complex forms. It
is an observable, testable fact that such necessary evolutionary trends don’t exist.

Bible Answer.
Ecclesiastes 10:18 , Says  By much slothfulness the building decayeth; and through idleness of the hands the house droppeth through.

Ecclesiastes  3:20 All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again.
Job  34:15 All flesh shall perish together, and man shall turn again unto dust.

Ecclesiastes  12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.
All this Bible verses agree with Science law of Entropy.
Things wear down. Nothing gets better by itself.

In Conclusion
There are lots of examples that prove that Science is in agreement with Bible facts and not in oppostion. but i cannot exhaust all the examples due to limited Space and time.

No wonder the great Scienctist and Physics great ,Albert Einstein said " Science without Religeon is Lame,Religeon without Science is Blind"

Thanks

BlueAgent

johnydon22:



LOL.. 'Let there be light' is not design, even the pope agrees and avows that it takes more of magic.

You must show us what an undesigned universe should be like so we can compare to draw a conclusion.



Yes there is no way some organisms reproduce sexually while others reproduce asexually.. isn't 'sexual' reproduction your example of design? meaning 'asexual reproductions are 'undesigned'.

lol.. face it brother no matter how much you yank it nature is very diverse, uncharted and unplanned, happens in every way.

Diversity of gametes in sexually reproducing organisms developed from a simpler initial asexual form, splitting of daughter cells, assimilation of mitochondria into the cellular composition, these add credence to a consistent development.

---

Let me further buggle your mind - even if we add a God to the picture it still falls down back to chance.

- a chance that there somehow is a God and not 'nothing'
-a chance that this god turns out to have an ability to create
- a chance that in a literal unending loop of existence this god just pops up one day and decides to create everything
- a chance that the things created are part of the things he created and other inexistent things are not.

You cannot ruled out the infinite reach of chance, how ever you may try to wriggle around it, it will always fall back down to remarkable chance.

Yet again this God you are invoking; isn't it precise? isn't it a functional system like every other living entity?

Isn't it equally as intricate or more? If going by your argument humans must require design then won't this God also require design if we follow your arguments?

-since complexity connotes design to you therefore this God must require design, if not your argument shatters as usual

or is it just a conscious nebulous cloud of nothing




wouldn't wings be a very wonderful thing for humans to have also? why don't we have it then?

Ostrich has wings but yet don't fly, did the designer encounter difficulty there or should be we say it is incompetent of pulling off a better design?

Adaptation and natural selection.


Human body also is, snakes also have that even more so but there move on land.

It points to a random selection since these features you may point out also exists in other examples starkly unrelated to the given examples.



showing design require pre-existing materials and inspirations to occur and not magic 'let the oceans produce fishes' is not design.

we did not design an aeroplane by speaking to ourselves without any pre-existing inspiration and materials and it took very many long periods of trials and errors.



Says who?

but yet they produce result.


If this universe is your idea of a carefully made system, you have a serious problem of observation of obvious facts.



You see where your problem lies is arguing against a premise you simply don't even understand.

One can simply point out - Natural selection..

An evolutionary mechanism, organisms that are capable of adapting to a given habitat continues and thrives while ones unable die off [extinction]

Evolution is not a linear process of improvement, it is diversely random. It can go any way and every way in coincide with the given factors involved.

Not a linear one way development.

You need to read, understand before rushing off to argue against things you don't even have an idea of.



The truth is you don't even know what the word evolution is..simpler values can accumulate into intricate values and complex values can be broken into simpler values - thus is the relationship, the complex things derive a fundamental bedrock from simpler values.

tiny atoms makes everything from these micro scale and not the other way round, giving cliche examples like humans decaying lends testimony to the fact that complex values are dependent on micro values.

hydrogen and oxygen molecule reacting will move from being simple elements into becoming a complex compound : water or hydrogen peroxide which still can be broken down into oxygen and hydrogen bits.

Accumulation of varying simple values leads to a complex system, a consistent building from the scratch not a remarkable drop of fully complex system from no where.



Drop the bible, pick up more science books at least you may yet go past this pitiable stage of always yapping about "thermodynamics" and always getting it wrong and pully out laws of thermodynamics from no where.

Or equating thermo manifestations to biological activities.


Bros you simply have no point here, not even one. You first of all need to understand science from the basic level before you can come back and try again.

You only poured out your personal beliefs all hewn from one ancient book you probably should be way above but rather choose to be bound mercilessly in a primitive ideology that deserves respect only as a product of human enquiry and probing audacity but must be recognized to be just as naive as it is ignorant and limited like most other ancient works.

All you have done here is to show you have no idea about the premises you have invoked but instead of agree to ignorance you fill that void of ignorance with the word 'God' convincing yourself that you've got the answer even without honest enquiry.

Through out the course of history and scientific development- things attributed to Gods has always dwindled and waned as more breakthroughs and discoveries are made.

God has always shown to be no more than the projection of human ignorance, a placeholder for ignorance.

E.G: Ptolemy of the Hellenistic age after observing planetary motions remarked "As i observe for my pleasure the to and fro movement of the planetary bodies, i no longer stand on the earth with my two feet but in the presence of zeus himself"

Ptolemy was awed by the remarkable manifestation of celestial motions, his ignorance more so inducing greater awe instead of agree ignorance to how their came about or the mechanism behind it, Ptolemy invoked God, zeus.

Centuries later, isaac newton figured out the problem of planetary motion - gravity and God was canceled from the mechanism of planetary motion as Ptolemy did because unlike Ptolemy he figured out how they happened.

But Newton came to the problem of solar stability, he came to the apex of his knowledge and mathematics, he was ignorant of that level of solar orbital dance, he did like Ptolemy and invoked his own God [christian God]

Laplace came along years later and solved the problem of stability with this calculations of perturbation and thus goes, the God of Newton was shattered from the equation; a small beautiful maths found in the 'principa mathematica' removed the God of newton from the solution of solar stability.

when asked the role of god in the equation leplace simply answered "i have no need of that hypothesis"

You see; Gods may exist or not [billions of them if you will] but if you only hide God in a place shielded by scientific ignorance in order to derive basis or relevance for the existence of god then i'm sorry that is a feeble attempt because as more discoveries are being made and as study progresses 'God will always be a receding pocket of scientific ignorance'


as Paul Heinrich Dietrich, Baron von Holbach once out it

"If a faithful account was rendered of Man’s ideas upon Divinity, he would be obliged to acknowledge, that for the most part the word ‘gods’ has been used to express the concealed, remote, unknown causes of the effects he witnessed; that he applies this term when the spring of the natural, the source of known causes, ceases to be visible: as soon as he loses the thread of these causes, or as soon as his mind can no longer follow the chain, he solves the difficulty, terminates his research, by ascribing it to his gods . . . When, therefore, he ascribes to his gods the production of some phenomenon . . . does he, in fact, do any thing more than substitute for the darkness of his own mind, a sound to which he has been accustomed to listen with reverential awe? "

......


Exactly cus science and religion are siblings, children of philosophy. but there is more to religion that yours.

there are very many religions with deep profound cosmogony very relatable to modern scientific findings even though very old more so than your bible - Hinduism

even on ones with no pointer to creator deities - Taoism, Buddism, Jainism.

and i have always found them more honest, sincere and open minded to the possibilities that are and always recognize their postulations and myths to be eloquent human philosophies and speculations about the natural world that possibly may be or not be true.

even though Hinduism proposes a deity, it always holds the idea of an unending universe going in circles going through births and rebirths [Almost same as the big bang cosmological model proposes of there is sufficient matter in the universe to reverse the expansion like i mentioned earlier above]

But yet in one of the hindu Vedas: One of the hymns in the Rigveda speculates on various cosmic forces which might have fashioned the universe. It concludes with a passage of most Sophisticated scepticism , beginning: 'But, after all, who knows, and who can say whence it all came, and how creation happened.'

That is a remarkable and deep clear cut honesty and intellectual humility something both you and your religion lacks rather boast of intellectual dishonesty buttered with arrogance even in ignorance.

that is surely a dangerous factor to the intellectual evolution of the human species.



Thanks too, hope you learn a thing or two. at least intellectual honesty and humility and learn more before attempting to teach to avoid the sad show above.


Johnydon22 signing off..

Cc. Teempakguy, Loj, donffd, hardmirror, cloudgoddess, davien, frecocoa, weah, frank317, dalaman, theEYe21

HCpaul:
I love it when religious fanatics are trying to associate science with religion. All the rapid and progressive development achieved in science are part of evolution itself.
But did you know that Science is a superset of religion while religion is just an aspect of philosophy.

If you are not ignorant of what scientific theories entails, you will realize that beliefs and other religious theories are discarded.
You can't be a science genius and retain the standard of a real Christian. Science and Religion are two different things.

Africans are the only setback that the world has.
The whites presented us Education, Religion, Civilization, Science and Technology, but among all these, Nigerians only anticipated Religion so as to easily hide their ignorance and assumptions.
Everything about Africans have been lame, irrational and apparently not worthy of emulation.

Bro! We don't create value for our lives when we don't know and we are not ready to know.

We are the most religious but still unable to control our economy. What a religious jugi - jugi.

felixomor:


Please who is "nature'?
Where does she or he live?
How do u know he is ruled by chance?

felixomor:


Please who is "nature'?
Where does she or he live?
How do u know he is ruled by chance?

davien:
Nature is but a term used for how the universe operates itself, because the universe lacks any demonstrable entity.

She or he isn't relevant to nature.. it's not anthropomorphic, that-is nature isn't bound by human gender nor characters though we humans often regard it as a mother to best describe the way it shrouds everything... living and non-living.

Everywhere.. The very definition itself puts nature at every level of existence that can, is and will be known.

johnydon22:


Next time ask what not who... this egoistic anthropomorphism has always being the greatest problem humans have in understanding the universe.

Everything is not limited to who, he, she.... when next you ask

what is nature?

widening the horizons of possible answers then my reply to you becomes..

-Drop your phone and go outside, buy a telescope, buy a microscope.

That's all.

felixomor:


I hope u know u havent touched the question. Moreover, personally speaking, we know u dont av a telescope, nor a microscope

HCpaul:
I love it when religious fanatics are trying to associate science with religion. All the rapid and progressive development achieved in science are part of evolution itself.
But did you know that Science is a superset of religion while religion is just an aspect of philosophy.

If you are not ignorant of what scientific theories entails, you will realize that beliefs and other religious theories are discarded.
You can't be a science genius and retain the standard of a real Christian. Science and Religion are two different things.

Africans are the only setback that the world has.
The whites presented us Education, Religion, Civilization, Science and Technology, but among all these, Nigerians only anticipated Religion so as to easily hide their ignorance and assumptions.
Everything about Africans have been lame, irrational and apparently not worthy of emulation.

Bro! We don't create value for our lives when we don't know and we are not ready to know.

We are the most religious but still unable to control our economy. What a religious jugi - jugi.

felixomor:


I hope u know u havent touched the question.

Moreover, personally speaking, we know u dont av a telescope, nor a microscope

felixomor:


Ok, pls u just said the universe 'operates itself'
Pls can u list examples of other things that 'operates itself' ?
We are learning.

johnydon22:
I answered far better than i ever can in definition - not define it rather show it.

If you can't grasp it then obviously i can't help you



Speak for yourself

johnydon22:


The universe again is your answer... we know nothing outside the universe.

the universe is the totality of everthing..

You simply do not know how to phrase a question: your question should have been.

Is there anything apart from the entirety of the universe that operates itself..?

another answer - The stars.

felixomor:


Logic hole 1: 'the universe is the totality of everything"

You are WRONG.
Even no scientist has ever made that statement because no one has been able to traverse the universe let alone going outside it.

U need a totality to sucessfully make an exclusion
E.G.
To say that there is "no policeman IN A CITY" means you must traverse the city thorough and sucessfully exclude the personality of a policeman, before making such statement.

Years ago, there were "only nine planets". But we now know that that statement was false by whosoever made it that time.
My dear i hope u see ur fallacy.

Your answer should have simply been "i dont know, sincerely"

And a more truthful answer would av been 'nothing really starts operating itself, its a scientific law, yet to be defied by any experiment'.

But its typical aethist pride, we know.
And its right at work in u, even though u r not yet an aethist

johnydon22:


It's always like playing a board game with a kid when arguing you theist, please how exactly does traversing the entirety of the universe related to avowing the universe is everything?

You should simply read your posts before posting them...

No scientist has ever made that statement - i wonder what scientist mean to you lot

[ The Universe is all of time and space and its contents.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe ]

Talk trash next time.



Very off hook analogy, you are relating an analogy of "No policeman in a city" to an assertion "the universe is everything"



You need an upgrade before you can pin point fallacies because all you did was create one in your head starkly unrelated to my assertion and then dance around it.


Oh i gave a very simple answer - The universe again is your answer... we know nothing outside the universe.

which is the truth, we know of nothing yet that can be pointed to be outside the universe. so the self operating nature of the universe remains our number one example.



Why do you lot always talk so much crap with so much arrogance - just after i have treated ignorant misconception above.

"Cause and effect" is a law of the macro state, breaks down in the micro level, quantum tunnelling, quantum fluctuations, Physical laws of the macro state breaks down in the quantum state.

quantum level contradicts basically almost every macro law of physics.

In fact let me also give an example of things operating themselves with external influence - certain subatomic particles can be induced to speed up all by themselves with any external force.

http://news.mit.edu/2015/self-accelerating-particles-0120

This murders your naivete that no experiment has defiled laws of cause and effect [motion]

I sure do hope you argue less from ignorance now.



Anyone who reads this can only imagine how confused or idiotic you must be - i'm sure you are the one who states who is an atheist or not.

"I'm having a personal relationship with the supposed creator of the cosmos, but oh atheists are the proud one"

And it's atheist not aethist[/b]

johnydon22:


It's always like playing a board game with a kid when arguing you theist, please how exactly does traversing the entirety of the universe related to avowing the universe is everything?

You should simply read your posts before posting them...

No scientist has ever made that statement - i wonder what scientist mean to you lot

[ The Universe is all of time and space and its contents.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe ]

Talk trash next time.



Very off hook analogy, you are relating an analogy of "No policeman in a city" to an assertion "the universe is everything"



You need an upgrade before you can pin point fallacies because all you did was create one in your head starkly unrelated to my assertion and then dance around it.


Oh i gave a very simple answer - The universe again is your answer... we know nothing outside the universe.

which is the truth, we know of nothing yet that can be pointed to be outside the universe. so the self operating nature of the universe remains our number one example.



Why do you lot always talk so much crap with so much arrogance - just after i have treated ignorant misconception above.

"Cause and effect" is a law of the macro state, breaks down in the micro level, quantum tunnelling, quantum fluctuations, Physical laws of the macro state breaks down in the quantum state.

quantum level contradicts basically almost every macro law of physics.

In fact let me also give an example of things operating themselves with external influence - certain subatomic particles can be induced to speed up all by themselves with any external force.

http://news.mit.edu/2015/self-accelerating-particles-0120

This murders your naivete that no experiment has defiled laws of cause and effect [motion]

I sure do hope you argue less from ignorance now.



Anyone who reads this can only imagine how confused or idiotic you must be - i'm sure you are the one who states who is an atheist or not.

"I'm having a personal relationship with the supposed creator of the cosmos, but oh atheists are the proud one"

And it's atheist not aethist[/b]

felixomor:


First you start by quoting wikipedia.
Even kids edit wikipedia.
Whats that, its called shallow work.
Please be specific

Please lets not deviate too far from the question, i asked if u ever know any other thing "apart from the universe that operates itself?"

And then u make it clear that universe is everything by citing wikipedia.
But here is what some Cosmologists think

Read it here: http://io9.gizmodo.com/5799335/five-weird-theories-of-what-lies-outside-the-universe

I dont think their reasoning is stupid either, or are they?

Again, it shows u have limited your thoughts all by yourself.
Moreover you use the word "contents"
Every "content" has a "container"
My issue with u is that u cant even position your brain in a place to ask "what is outside of this container"?
Yet u claim to b scientifically oriented

Again u ask how does traversing the entirety of the universe avow "universe is everything"

Is it that u have problem with the word u used? "everything"
The word "everything" completely excludes "every other thing" Please if u dont know, know now.

And please let me tell u how you sound when u try to proclaim "everything" from inside and within the universe.

U sound like the capacitor telling the transistor what "everything" is, meanwhile they are both inside and within a television box.
How myopic could that be? (if u like twist the analogy)
Afterall its obvious u didnt get the "policeman in the city" analogy.
Overall, u clearly dont know that "everything" excludes "every other thing".

"we know nothing outside the universe"
You dont know that this statement can give birth to another true statement,
"we are inside the universe"
Or u want to disagree with that?

And if u are 'inside' the universe, how were u able to verify there is nothing 'outside'?
I hope u see how ur thinking has been restricted?

You want to be a professor of 'everything' yet you are 'inside' something.
How better can it get?

You keep saying "certain subatomic particles can be induced"
Please why the "induction"? ("induction" from the word 'induced" which you used, so that you wont swallow me.)
Is the induction not an influence?

Moreover macro and micro can both affect each other.
Actions and events at micro level can be an effect of what is happening at macro level.
It even buttresses the theory that what you see within the universe can be an effect of whats going on outside it.
Well u can argue against that, i am not in any way trying to win u over.

Atheists need no personal definition from me.
Atheism has long been associated with pride, The man who says there is No God despite the biillions of evidences around him is only full of his own brain.
He refuses to think of the possibility of what is outside the universe, what is the origin of the consciousness I posses? Why did my heart start beating all of a sudden when i was in my mother's womb?
Pride can never be more than that.

If you want to see the best of an atheist, make him the supreme leader of a nation.
I know u are not one anyway

johnydon22:


And the circle keeps going, a simple reply "we don't know anything outside the universe" is so hard tocomprehend, please how can you provide an example of something outside the universe when you don't know of any?



There are numerous theories as regard possibilities of universes, Multiverses, bubble or over laying universes many of them.

the truth remains nobody still have any idea of things outside this universe, so quoting theories still in no way helps your case because these hypothesis we recognize are speculations of possibilities.

again how can you give examples of things outside the universe when you know of nothing outside the universe.



Extra-terrestrial universes are areas i am firmly rooted in when it comes to cosmological terms, it is still a starkly uncertain topic only reachable by assumptive speculations.

The facts remains: Nobody knows if or what lies outside the universe, so you should straighten your points better.



Everything is a unifying word, a bundle of an entirety. . . Everything we know of is part of our universe, it sums up the totality of our space/time.

I wonder the so hard thing on something this simple to understand



Every expanse and constituents of space/time is the universe, if there are things outside the universe.

-other universes
-hypa-universe.

we do not know yet therefore we cannot give such an example when we don't know of any other thing outside the universe.



total mesh of nonsense.


Exactly the point, a very simple point you always miss in your hurry to engage in an infantile effort with meaningless circle of words.

"We know nothing outside the universe" therefore we cannot give an example of what we don't know.

keep on asking for examples after this.


You see now how you always employ nonsensical fallacies of ambiguity redefining a term to suit your own self even if means misrepresenting it.

The post suggest we know of nothing outside the universe therefore we cannot give an example of something outside the universe - how exactly does this elude you?



As usual simple terms eludes you cognition - it infers a distinct condition of physical quality.



OH this correct - micro is the foundations upon which the macro is built, the physical properties of the macro are due to the configurations at the micro bits.

So in line with the infinite universe theory [everything is a universe of it's own] the universe we know might in fact be just a micro bit in a much larger plain, a defining constituent amongst lots more of a larger manifestation.



As usual replacing the ignorance of your mind with the sound 'God'. . . it takes attendant idiocy to always hope to replace a gap of ignorance with any assumption that comes to mind.

Posing questions that are all parts of our scientific enquiry but then having a preconceived answer in the face of ignorance.

-You have no evidence to support your claim of a deity, only hiding behind places of human enquiry shielded by a curtain of scientific ignorance.

that there are questions you have no answer to doesn't mean gods did it, it simply means you don't have the answer yet.

invoking gods would rather terminate your research while deluding you with the notion that you've got the answer.

-Give us evidence of your God.

You cannot point at a tree to infer tree fairies exist, provide empirical evidence for them not tender your claim as evidence.



I'm sure you know, isn't that what religious belief is about? Pretending you KNOW something you Don't.

That's a trait and arrogance only simpletons can harbour

Pdizzle:
^^^So much ado about nothing. How can we even say something exists outside the universe, when we don't know how vast the universe is. The universe might be unending, nobody knows, so spare us the tale of existence of something outside of it, or give us proof.