FaH33m said:Infact if you go through this link posted by qsahmed above ,
PROVING THE EXISTENCE OF ALLAH TO AN ATHEIST
Though the link is more like proving allah of islam , it is true to some extent..
PaulBarber said:I have my comments on this, but we'd better not discuss this in a public forum.
Nick Naylor said:I proved that you're wrong, and if you're wrong I'm right.
blr_p said:There is a misunderstanding with the word theory as used in science as compared to english. See this.
So when you say theory in English, it actually means hypothesis in science
As to how good this theory is, wiki says
So in plain english Big Bang is not 'just a theory' but has good support.
See below in above referenced wiki article
GameNome said:We have created amino acids and nucleic acids which are the basic buliding blocks of life in our laboratories from simple molecules which were present in the earths atmosphere at that time.
I think abiogeneisis is more plausible than believing something we have never seen or have any single minute shred of evidence for plonked us upon the earth.
BF1983 said:I also take offense to the saying that once a person becomes educated he/she becomes an atheist. Who do you think runs so many renowned educational institutions around the world - The Catholic church. Why would they want to promote education if it would make people atheists ? :S
BF1983 said:I am sorry but you are free to call my argument childish but it is completely illogical for me to believe that a single cellular organism can come to life out of inanimate matter and then suddenly get the ability to reproduce itself and then become multi cellular. Where did all that information come from ? How did this single cellular organism suddenly get the information to multiply and reproduce itself.
The very fact that nature is very ordered (predator - prey, season etc) and the sheer complexity of a human being leads me to believe that some higher being designed all this.
Darwin believed that DNA was very simple. We now know that its extremely complex. How in the world did it become so complex ? Who provided all data so that it became complex ?
Mind you I am not against science. Heck I would not be on a technology forum if I did not ! :bleh: But at the same time I believe life and the universe is far too complex for it to be just some random events that happened.
BF1983 said:I am sorry but you are free to call my argument childish but it is completely illogical for me to believe that a single cellular organism can come to life out of inanimate matter and then suddenly get the ability to reproduce itself and then become multi cellular. Where did all that information come from ? How did this single cellular organism suddenly get the information to multiply and reproduce itself.
The very fact that nature is very ordered (predator - prey, season etc) and the sheer complexity of a human being leads me to believe that some higher being designed all this.
BF1983 said:That's the whole concept of an infinite being isn't it ? There is no beginning and no end. God simply exits. Again we are finite beings (I hope I don't have to prove that ! ) and so it is difficult to comprehend such things because we are making our judgment at a fixed point in time and at a fixed point in the universe.
BF1983 said:The fact that there are still competing theories about the origin of the universe and it is still open to debate I dont see why we should hold it as blind truth.
BF1983 said:For all the 'science' that the big bang theory claims to be. It still contradicts with other theories about the age of the universe. Here is another link about an age crisis - WMAP- Age of the Universe
The expansion age measured by WMAP is larger than the oldest globular clusters, so the Big Bang theory has passed an important test using data independent of the type collected by WMAP. If the expansion age measured by WMAP had been smaller than the oldest globular clusters, then there would have been something fundamentally wrong about either the Big Bang theory or the theory of stellar evolution. Either way, astronomers would have needed to rethink many of their cherished ideas. But our current estimate of age fits well with what we know from other kinds of measurements.
BF1983 said:since like others have pointed out, medicine and science have many secrets and a lot of garbage is passed between actual truth.
BF1983 said:Take the theory of evolution for example. They estimate the earth to be billions of years old. Yet it relies on carbon dating which has proved on numerous occasions to be grossly incorrect. Yet the theory of evolution is based almost entirely on this flawed method of testing and most of the scientific community take it as truth regardless. Hence I do not place much faith on 'theories'
Is Earth 4.5 Byr Old?
Radiometric Dating
Young Earth creationists have made a number of claims in the field of geophysics, mostly related to the age of the Earth and flood geology. According to the United States National Academy of Sciences, creation geophysics, and creation science more generally, fails to meet the key criteria of any true science because it lacks empirical support, supplies no tentative hypotheses, and resolves to describe natural history in terms of scientifically untestable supernatural events.
BF1983 said:Ok we are creating building blocks of life in our laboratories (but not life itself). But how come life formed so many years ago without any laboratories
I am sorry but you are free to call my argument childish but it is completely illogical for me to believe that a single cellular organism can come to life out of inanimate matter and then suddenly get the ability to reproduce itself and then become multi cellular. Where did all that information come from ? How did this single cellular organism suddenly get the information to multiply and reproduce itself.
The very fact that nature is very ordered (predator - prey, season etc) and the sheer complexity of a human being leads me to believe that some higher being designed all this.
Darwin believed that DNA was very simple. We now know that its extremely complex. How in the world did it become so complex ? Who provided all data so that it became complex ?
Mind you I am not against science. Heck I would not be on a technology forum if I did not ! :bleh: But at the same time I believe life and the universe is far too complex for it to be just some random events that happened.
Hacker said:So in short you are saying that life is too complex for you too understand so it must be designed by a designer aka higher being aka god.
Who told you there is no beginning and no end, who told you that god simply exists. Can you point to some scientific studies which have proven what you are saying.
Hacker said:Anyway whatever we say is not going to change your mind, you will cling to whatever beliefs and stories which make you feel safe, so live in your bubble and whenever you are ready, you can come out.
GameNome said:A simple answer is complex beings are better equipped to compete for natural resources.
No one needs to provide any new data, as you call it, but rather the old data mutates to perform new functions.Layer upon layer of these mutations makes us complex.
As for your higher being theory, all the creatures who roam the earth presently weren't introduced all at once, rather,thousands of new species have been continually introduced into the environment throughout time.
How did each of these new species emerge? Consider the Eohippus--an early species of horse-- How did it come into existence? Did a pair of adult eohyppi suddenly materialize out of nowhere 50 million years ago ? And is this higher being creating species even today ? Is it possible that I could be walking in a field somewhere and suddenly - BOOM - I have a new species of adult horse right in front of me ?
Evolution is a matter of observation really not belief, most of the organisms around us are not really unique enough for me to say evolution is impossible/improbable.
greenhorn said:Science does not have all the answers. Neither does Religion. Ask them the right questions, be happy with the answers you get. Both of them exist to serve us. When you let Religion take over you, you become too bigoted, and if you take science take over you, you become too skeptical. Use either of them as required, and you'll be happy
BF1983 said:I never said evolution is complete BS. It has a lots of truth in it. But I refuse to believe in it entirely. I do not for instance believe that we evolved from apes and that life formed out of inanimate matter.
greenhorn said:Science does not have all the answers. Neither does Religion. Ask them the right questions, be happy with the answers you get. Both of them exist to serve us. When you let Religion take over you, you become too bigoted, and if you take science take over you, you become too skeptical. Use either of them as required, and you'll be happy