wow you seriously look like an idiot and a hypocrite with that post.
we have tried being patient with you but you dont seem to get it
You can quote your "intelligent scientists" all you like but their opinions doesnt change ours. Just because someone smarter than you has the same beliefs as you do it doesnt give your argument ANY credibility.
Also how does Lord William Thomson Kelvin count as a modern scientist he died in 1907! a lot has changed in 100 years.
And why is it difficult for a scientist to admit they belive in god? The scientific community isnt some sort of atheist gang that dismiss scientist believers as any less entitled to an opinion.
And no you havnt explained how god can exist yet the universe is incappable of existing in the same way. By your current reasoning that everything has to have been created by your own logic then that means God/Superior Being whatever has to have had a creator as well. And if thats true then he/it is hardly a superior being let alone a god!
And that's a only very small fraction of them. Would you like to see more?
So to you, the opinion of some first year students are more credible than that of some of the greatest scientific minds in modern and recent history?
None of this matters? What the hell is that supposed to mean?
I don't know where you heard religion is dying, but it isn't - and a growing number of intelligent scientists around the world are starting to openly admit they believe in God or a 'Supreme and intelligible Creator'
It's difficult for a scientists to openly admit that they believe in God, because it undermines their credibility in the eyes of the scientific community due to the stigma attached to it.
His book sucks aswell
I addressed this concept in one of my earlier posts. I don't think many people believe God is ABSOLUTELY perfect (though I could be wrong), when you really think about it how can something be perfection? Something can always be improved in some way. But I'd say pretty damn close to perfection.
please do.
Debating with people like you is like pissing into the breeze.
According to a 1996 survey, about 60% of scientists in the United States expressed disbelief or doubt in such a god.This compared with 58% in 1914 and 67% in 1933. Among leading scientists defined as members of the National Academy of Sciences, 72.2% expressed disbelief and 93% - disbelief or doubt in the existence of a personal god in 1998.
Your opinion, it is subjective - flawed from the outset.
You shouldn't rely on statistics from a survey to come to that conclusion that religion and belief in God are 'dying out'.
Will post some more soon, or tomorrow.
Because what you're going to do is go to the Institute for Creation Research or Wikipedia and copy one of their lists - it will say something like "creation scientists can now be found in literally every discipline of science, and their numbers are increasing rapidly"
Really? So a survey, done in ONE country, in 1996, 12 years ago, is supposed to be evidence that belief in God is dying out?
Negative. I obtained those quotes from a variety of sources. They are quotes from well respected and incredibly intelligent people from around the world. I'm not sure exactly what the point is that you are trying to make, if any..yawn, i'm off, night.
Something newer and closer tome home then?
I'm fairly confident that nearly everyone else on the forum will understand the point I was making.
But some may ask, "But who created God?" But the answer is that by definition He is not created; He is eternal. He is the One who brought time, space, and matter into existence. Since the concept of causality deals with space, time, and matter, and since God is one who brought space, time, and matter into existence, the concept of causality does not apply to God since it is something related to the reality of space, time, and matter. Since God is before space, time, and matter, the issue of causality does not apply to Him.Omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, omnibenevolence, and eternal and necessary existence. Look it up tbh.It does depend on your individual belief though, there are of course some religions that believe in multiple God(s) or deities. The Christian religion is, arguably the one religion with the most historical evidence to support it though (in the form of the Bible) As for scientists, there is probably a decent amount of scientists that believe in the Christian God - while some others, it seems just believe in a "higher power", unsure exactly what but something.man, I hope atleast some of you appreciate the effort I put in these posts :disappoin
Did you even read what I said about the accuracy of surveys? They only survey a small amount of people Unless of course they get their results from the cencus or something. Only 32% don't have a religion? It's not much, and even then just because someone doesn't follow a religion doesn't mean they don't consider themselves spiritual and/or believe in God, take me for example - I'm not religious but I still believe in God, or atleast pretty damn convinced so far..
You probably shouldn't have bothered going to the effort of explaining the carbon dating thing, I'm not all that in it interested to be honest
But working in the field of Geology, of course you are going to be adamant that the tools you use are completely accurate, or maintain that appearance when I've heard lots of evidence to the contrary
Mind you I don't doubt that Earth is millions of years old, the thing that gets me is how some scientists claim to know exactly how the planet was back then, exactly what the landscape/climate was and exactly how everything happened, and ALL of this information from some friggin' rocks and a few other scraps of evidence?!
that's the kind of thing that pisses me off is some scientists trying to force their biased beliefs and explanations on people when in reality they have very little knowledge of how everything happened
I'm curious, you say you know of a few scientists who are also religious. Do you know any personally, in your field of work? If you do - what's your view on that? Do you think people can logically believe in God and respect science aswell?(sic)
If that's the case why hasn't life developed on any of the many planets around us? Some of them have somewhat habitable landscapes for life to develop, yet they are completely barren. I suppose they haven't been fully explored, but still you'd think we would have found something by now
lol, so you actually genuinely really believe that scientists might eventually find the answers to the existence of the universe, life and reality?
So I guess you could say, 'it came from the effect of the Big Bang' or something - but it's as if there is something that wanted this all to work, y'know? Or I guess it's your opinion that it's all just a huge coincidence of random events.
There's nothing really wrong with using wikipedia as a source of information either
Jerry Bergman
It is truly pathetic that you continue to follow science blindly so determinedly when clearly it does not, and will not ever have the answers to the truth of our unique existence in the universe. Learn to start thinking outside the box, and learn to appreciate the unbelievably amazing complexity of everything around us, and you will begin to appreciate life in a new way.
Ok, Climate - when reconstructing past climate multi-proxy analysis is typically used. This can include tree rings, ice cores, deep sea cores, pollen records, etc. All these can be used to infer past climate. It isn't rocket science.Past Landscape? Fission track dating, cosmogenic nuclide sampling, cores, geodesy, the list goes on. Once again, it isn't difficult stuff to understand, but if you can't be bothered then don't try. I dare say it is beyond you anyway.
You, and others have some specific ideas about answers to the questions we don't know the answers to. I don't know the right answers, but I am pretty comfortable that they aren't the ones you're proposing, because they contradict much of what we've managed to learn to date.
You look around, and nothing looks created to you? But everything WAS created. It was created by the Big Bang, aswell (sic) as whatever created The Big Bang.
Oh really. So how exactly do you know it's not the "truth"? Enlighten me oh knowledgable one. The fact is, some of the greatest thinking minds in our history have concluded that the only way everything like this can really exist, can only really be explained by some supremely intelligent and higher being having purposefully designed it all.we're talking Copernicus, Newton, Darwin, Einstein, aswell as numerous other geniuses...so what do you say to that? Are you a greater and more knowledgable mind than Copernicus, Newton Darwin and Einstein?I'm not the saying it's the truth either, but it's the most plausible explanation whether YOU like it or not.
Just to put this into perspective, a mathematical calculation has been done to calculate how probable the "chance" of a planet like this existing outside our solar system is: it's something like 1/1000000000000 (one in a trillion) considering there are quite likely only in the "billions" of planets in the universe, it's basically impossible.
In fact, if it indeed was all random coincidence, we would probably be in a dangerous part of the universe, our solar system and planetary conditions would be fucked, we would either be weird creatures with four eyes and six arms or we would be DEAD, but we're not - we're intelligent, complex, thinking, contemplating, discovering, consciously aware beings with the ability to discover the workings of nature and the universe itself.
I believe (yes BELIEVE, motherf*cker) there is a reason why our existence is not a perfect one, and that it was intended to be that way. I don't know why of course, I can only guess and contemplate.. I also think it is quite possible Earth was meant to be a "paradise" type place, but for whatever reason it could not be..
I mean... if everything in the universe is a very complex set of well-defined working laws, it's going to take a while for everything to start working harmoniously from the moment of creation, for the laws of nature to establish and start working effectively, things like that take time they don't just happen instantly.
and although i'm not a Christian or religious in any way, and I have yet to read the Bible and learn all about this Jesus character, I have to admit I am interested to, from what i've seen there are lots of amazing, influential, thought-provoking scriptures and stories beneficial to mankind in there that are well worth reading, a lot of it backed up by historical evidence (of course there will always be debates about inconsistencies, literal interpretations ect. ect.)
Again I will quote Lord William Thomson Kelvin..Quote:"Overwhelmingly strong proofs of intelligent and benevolent design lie around us...the atheistic idea is so non-sensical that I cannot put it into words."It's difficult for a scientists to openly admit that they believe in God, because it undermines their credibility in the eyes of the scientific community due to the stigma attached to it.
I addressed this concept in one of my earlier posts. I don't think many people believe God is ABSOLUTELY perfect (though I could be wrong), when you really think about it how can something be perfection? Something can always be improved in some way. But I'd say pretty damn close to perfection, imo, if it has the ability to create a complex universe for life to live. Assuming one does believe in God, the fact that everything may not have gone to plan, I don't think that's something we can fault the Creator for, considering it still gave us the privilege to exist in the first place, and especially if it is true that we brought our own demise upon us.
His comment about atheism rings true today as much as did it back then, therefore his quote is indeed still very relevant.
Yeah I'm not going to read that, or going to respond to any of it - I read a bit of your post and you are talking an absolute load of shit now Ngati.And I'm sick of you people acting like a bunch of cocks for no reason, so fuck all of youHave fun believing that the the world, the universe and everything magically appeared to due to completely random chance! you dumb fucks
have fun believing the universe and everything magically appeared
Oh, I'm sorry you didn't take the time to read it in its entirety. I, at least, took the time to read all of your posts (well, everyone's posts :/ ).If I'm acting like a cock, then you're a chicken for not presenting any evidence and just flat out coming forward with emotional responses, and your feelings, or presenting dubious research from dubious sites.Thanks, finally, for your excellent sign off. I will hold that close to my chest for all eternity (or until I die).I can thus, reciprocally, wish you freedom from your shackles of ignorance and superstition and that one day you discover peace and tolerance, along with your intelligence.
"When you are searching for truth you should use every possible avenue, including revelation," said Dr. Murray, who is a member of the Pontifical Academy, which advises the Vatican on scientific issues, and who described the influence of his faith on his work in his memoir, "Surgery of the Soul" (Science History Publications, 2002).Since his appearance at the City College panel, when he was dismayed by the tepid reception received by his remarks on the incompatibility of good science and religious belief, Dr. Hauptman said he had been discussing the issue with colleagues in Buffalo, where he is president of the Hauptman-Woodward Medical Research Institute. "I think almost without exception the people I have spoken to are scientists and they do believe in the existence of a supreme being," he said. "If you ask me to explain it - I cannot explain it at all."Dr. Collins said he believed that some scientists were unwilling to profess faith in public "because the assumption is if you are a scientist you don't have any need of action of the supernatural sort," or because of pride in the idea that science is the ultimate source of intellectual meaning.But he said he believed that some scientists were simply unwilling to confront the big questions religion tried to answer. "You will never understand what it means to be a human being through naturalistic observation," he said. "You won't understand why you are here and what the meaning is. Science has no power to address these questions - and are they not the most important questions we ask ourselves?"
That's what YOU believe ya fucking dipshit
because god pulling the universe out of a hat isn't magic?no magic in my world view - unless you are talking about the magic of science