Atheism and the Celestial Teapot!

[Sassy]

Aside from the confusion of abiogenesis with the process of evolution itself, you need to be reminded that for believers there is always the question: "If God made the world, why did he make it so badly"

Evolution the unproved theory.

Life had nothing to come from given the scientists explanation of the ball of gases.
What is further proof is that some planets older than ours don't have life.
What is it about the obvious that so many 'millions' of planets and only one earth exists?

Whatever happened on earth had nothing to do with the make-up of the planet or it's original process of coming into being.
Because for such a thing to be possible many earths around us would need to exist.

God created the world and the universe we know. He put life on our planet and created a system to sustain that life.
If he destroyed it, everything would die.

[Maeght]

Evolution the unproved theory.

Stick to theology Sassy because you just don't understand science.

[torridon]

Evolution the unproved theory.

Life had nothing to come from given the scientists explanation of the ball of gases.
What is further proof is that some planets older than ours don't have life.
What is it about the obvious that so many 'millions' of planets and only one earth exists?

Whatever happened on earth had nothing to do with the make-up of the planet or it's original process of coming into being.
Because for such a thing to be possible many earths around us would need to exist.

God created the world and the universe we know. He put life on our planet and created a system to sustain that life.
If he destroyed it, everything would die.

 

 .. the original 'just-so' story. Naïve, superficial, mildly titillating perhaps, but ultimately inconsequential.

[Sassy]

Stick to theology Sassy because you just don't understand science.

SCIENCE.... you mean there is evidence where the first life originated from?

What you mean to say, is :- "Stick to what you know Sassy, because we (being (you) and others who believe in science as the start of life) have no evidence or proof where life actually came from. You see evolution does not explain or give an explanation.
It is like building a wall without a foundation there is nothing to allow a wall to exist."

In everything there has to be a foundation. Life and how it came into being had to be the foundational truth in creation/evolution.
You have theories and nothing to support the theory because there is no science to explain the first life.

You cannot build a wall without laying the foundation to support the wall. Just as you cannot build an answer in science
regarding evolution or any part of creation without the foundational answer of how the first life came into existence.

It isn't rocket science and however much it sticks in your throat.

The facts are the facts... Science has no answers to how the first life came into existence.
Something has to have lived and died for life of any sought to have come from it. Like maggots on the flesh of dead animals etc.
The matter was originally a life force.

God is the life force which created man. Man cannot recreate it, or even explain it.

[Maeght]

SCIENCE.... you mean there is evidence where the first life originated from?

What you mean to say, is :- "Stick to what you know Sassy, because we (being (you) and others who believe in science as the start of life) have no evidence or proof where life actually came from. You see evolution does not explain or give an explanation.
It is like building a wall without a foundation there is nothing to allow a wall to exist."

In everything there has to be a foundation. Life and how it came into being had to be the foundational truth in creation/evolution.
You have theories and nothing to support the theory because there is no science to explain the first life.

You cannot build a wall without laying the foundation to support the wall. Just as you cannot build an answer in science
regarding evolution or any part of creation without the foundational answer of how the first life came into existence.

It isn't rocket science and however much it sticks in your throat.

The facts are the facts... Science has no answers to how the first life came into existence.
Something has to have lived and died for life of any sought to have come from it. Like maggots on the flesh of dead animals etc.
The matter was originally a life force.

God is the life force which created man. Man cannot recreate it, or even explain it.

Again, showing your lack of understanding of science and what it tells us.

[Sebastian Toe]

Evolution the unproved theory.

Life had nothing to come from given the scientists explanation of the ball of gases.
What is further proof is that some planets older than ours don't have life.
What is it about the obvious that so many 'millions' of planets and only one earth exists?

Whatever happened on earth had nothing to do with the make-up of the planet or it's original process of coming into being.
Because for such a thing to be possible many earths around us would need to exist.

God created the world and the universe we know. He put life on our planet and created a system to sustain that life.
If he destroyed it, everything would die.

The phrase 'not even wrong' somehow springs to mind!

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

In everything there has to be a foundation. Life and how it came into being had to be the foundational truth in creation/evolution.
You have theories and nothing to support the theory because there is no science to explain the first life.

You cannot build a wall without laying the foundation to support the wall. Just as you cannot build an answer in science
regarding evolution or any part of creation without the foundational answer of how the first life came into existence.

It isn't rocket science and however much it sticks in your throat.

The facts are the facts... Science has no answers to how the first life came into existence.

Sassy: Here's one you (and other Christians here) may be interested in: In the ten plagues of Egypt, Pharaoh's magicians could replicate the first and second plague, but not the third (Exodus 8:16-18). Ask yourself why couldn't they replicate the third plague (if you don't already know)? How did Pharaoh's magicians respond?

[Brownie]

The purpose of the magicians replicating the actions causing the plagues was to show Moses and Aaron to be frauds.  All looked good for two but their inability to do the same with the third plague onwards showed the magicians to be frauds or at least to have limited powers.  When they failed at the third task they cried out to Pharoah that the power Moses demonstrated was from God.

[Anchorman]

Sassy: Here's one you (and other Christians here) may be interested in: In the ten plagues of Egypt, Pharaoh's magicians could replicate the first and second plague, but not the third (Exodus 8:16-18). Ask yourself why couldn't they replicate the third plague (if you don't already know)? How did Pharaoh's magicians respond?

Assuming of course that the events of Exodus are faithfully recorded in the Pentateuch which shows heavy 'editing' in the6th and 5th centuries BC.
Sorry, SOTS. but the Pentateuch is unreliable as a historical account - there is no timescale, no name - and the word 'Pharaoh' did not become applicable as a title before 945 BC (King Siamun, dyn XXI)
The term was used as a generalisation for the royal authority during Hatshepsut's term as king, because the Egyptians could not easily adapt male to female tuitulary.

[Enki]

Presumably because the magicians could not create life as only Aaron could do this by creating lice from  the dust of Egypt by using God's power. Mind you, I think the magicians might have had a good excuse because there was no dust then left in Egypt, of course.   Instead, as the story goes, they then realised that God had much more power than they had.

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

The purpose of the magicians replicating the actions causing the plagues was to show Moses and Aaron to be frauds.  All looked good for two but their inability to do the same with the third plague onwards showed the magicians to be frauds or at least to have limited powers.  When they failed at the third task they cried out to Pharoah that the power Moses demonstrated was from God.

Some good observations there Brownie. Thanks

[Sassy]

Again, showing your lack of understanding of science and what it tells us.

You know that is a red herring.
Because the truth is that had you real knowledge of Science you would not require such an excuse.
But the truth is that if you set out to prove science you find the truth that when it comes to life and creations beginning, it does not have an answer.

So please by all means give us the answer to the origins of  life or admit science doesn't have one.

[Sassy]

Sassy: Here's one you (and other Christians here) may be interested in: In the ten plagues of Egypt, Pharaoh's magicians could replicate the first and second plague, but not the third (Exodus 8:16-18). Ask yourself why couldn't they replicate the third plague (if you don't already know)? How did Pharaoh's magicians respond?

The finger of God is elementary for believers...  There is no higher power. Only God can create life from dust. The life of the lice was created from the dust.  No man can take dust or anything which is dead matter and create life.
You can bring something back to life or change elements to kill things. But God turned dust into a living thing.
Only God can create and give life.

[Maeght]

You know that is a red herring.

Its not, you have no understanding of science, yet you were posting about it.

Because the truth is that had you real knowledge of Science you would not require such an excuse.

Nonsense - and I have a scientific degree.

But the truth is that if you set out to prove science you find the truth that when it comes to life and creations beginning, it does not have an answer.

So please by all means give us the answer to the origins of  life or admit science doesn't have one.

Science does not currently know how life started on this planet and no scientist claims to know.

[floo]

The finger of God is elementary for believers...  There is no higher power. Only God can create life from dust. The life of the lice was created from the dust.  No man can take dust or anything which is dead matter and create life.
You can bring something back to life or change elements to kill things. But God turned dust into a living thing.
Only God can create and give life.

Your evidence  for that statement is lacking.

[Sassy]

Its not, you have no understanding of science, yet you were posting about it.

Prove it... Bring the science and show what I science I was referring to and prove beyond doubt it ain't a theory.  ( Anyone seen Jesus yet? You have more chance of his return that Maeght proving the point.)

Nonsense - and I have a scientific degree.

A scientific degree will not allow you to know more than is taught or change theories to fact.
Ask them who wrote the papers and taught the science for your degree.

Science does not currently know how life started on this planet and no scientist claims to know.

At last science has no answers and therefore admits it is all theory.
I rest my case I told you and I have always said this fact. I didn't need a degree in science to know the truth. Yet you took your time to admit yet again that science had no answers only theories when it comes to life.

[torridon]

At last science has no answers and therefore admits it is all theory.
I rest my case I told you and I have always said this fact. I didn't need a degree in science to know the truth. Yet you took your time to admit yet again that science had no answers only theories when it comes to life.

yes, science is all theory.  Even evolution, the most evidenced of all science theories, is still called the Theory of Evolution. Therein lies the strength of science; by retaining the humility that we don't have all the answers, we remain open to new learning and improvement on old knowledge; eschewing certainties and authority makes it easier to accept when we were wrong before, and easier to change our thinking.  This is a central virtue in the ethos of science, all knowledge is provisional until better data comes to light.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sassy,

Prove it... Bring the science and show what I science I was referring to and prove beyond doubt it ain't a theory.

Science doesn’t deal in proofs. That’s why it’s the theory of gravity, the theory of germs causing disease, the theory of evolution etc. The reason is that, while scientific theories are hugely well argued and well-evidenced, science allows for the possibility of further and better particulars emerging one day that would cause the theory to be amended or junked.

That’s its strength by the way, and it compares favourably with the views of the religious in particular who tend to deal in “sure and certain” truths that cannot respond to new information. 

[Maeght]

Prove it...

You prove it every time you say stuff like 'Evolution the unproven theory'. You won't understand why that shows you know nothing about science though.

..bring the science and show what I science I was referring to and prove beyond doubt it ain't a theory.  ( Anyone seen Jesus yet? You have more chance of his return that Maeght proving the point.)

There you go again.

A scientific degree will not allow you to know more than is taught or change theories to fact.
Ask them who wrote the papers and taught the science for your degree.

This was in response to your comment 'Because the truth is that had you real knowledge of Science'. Again, your comment about turning theories into facts shows you understand nothing about science.

At last science has no answers

Science has never claimed to know how life began on this planet so not sure why you say 'At last'.

.. and therefore admits it is all theory.

And there you go again.

I rest my case ...

Pretty poor effort.

... I told you and I have always said this fact. I didn't need a degree in science to know the truth.

You comment on science yet have no understanding of it. A science degree would certainly help there.

Yet you took your time to admit yet again that science had no answers only theories when it comes to life.

And your point is?

[Maeght]

Sassy,

Science doesn’t deal in proofs. That’s why it’s the theory of gravity, the theory of germs causing disease, the theory of evolution etc. The reason is that, while scientific theories are hugely well argued and well-evidenced, science allows for the possibility of further and better particulars emerging one day that would cause the theory to be amended or junked.

That’s its strength by the way, and it compares favourably with the views of the religious in particular who tend to deal in “sure and certain” truths that cannot respond to new information.

Sassy has had this explained many times but either doesn't get it or doesn't want to or both.

[Sassy]

Sassy has had this explained many times but either doesn't get it or doesn't want to or both.

TELL US HOW LIFE STARTED?

SHOW US THE EVIDENCE THAT PROVES EVOLUTION IF FACT.

OH, YOU CAN'T THAT'S RIGHT.

NOW WHO REALLY NEEDS THE TRUTH EXPLAINING TO THEM?  YOU AND ALL WHO HIDE BEHIND SOMETHING THAT DOES NOT EXIST.

AN ANSWER IN SCIENCE FOR ANYTHING TO DO WITH HOW LIFE FIRST STARTED.

So now you sulk off into your corner and you lick your wounds because you have NO ANSWER but GOD.  Your excuses are as pathetic as your claim to KNOW SCIENCE BECAUSE YOU TOOK A COURSE AND AN EXAM WHERE YOU WERE TOLD WHAT TO THINK NOT GIVEN EVIDENCE TO PROVE IT.

Clear now and so much better.  Seems science cannot give you what you need. TRUTH.

[Sebastian Toe]

TELL US HOW LIFE STARTED?

SHOW US THE EVIDENCE THAT PROVES EVOLUTION IF FACT.

OH, YOU CAN'T THAT'S RIGHT.

NOW WHO REALLY NEEDS THE TRUTH EXPLAINING TO THEM?  YOU AND ALL WHO HIDE BEHIND SOMETHING THAT DOES NOT EXIST.

AN ANSWER IN SCIENCE FOR ANYTHING TO DO WITH HOW LIFE FIRST STARTED.

So now you sulk off into your corner and you lick your wounds because you have NO ANSWER but GOD.  Your excuses are as pathetic as your claim to KNOW SCIENCE BECAUSE YOU TOOK A COURSE AND AN EXAM WHERE YOU WERE TOLD WHAT TO THINK NOT GIVEN EVIDENCE TO PROVE IT.

Clear now and so much better.  Seems science cannot give you what you need. TRUTH.

Oh look, if you type stuff in caps that makes it really, really real and that's a FACT.
  

[torridon]

TELL US HOW LIFE STARTED?

SHOW US THE EVIDENCE THAT PROVES EVOLUTION IF FACT.

OH, YOU CAN'T THAT'S RIGHT.

NOW WHO REALLY NEEDS THE TRUTH EXPLAINING TO THEM?  YOU AND ALL WHO HIDE BEHIND SOMETHING THAT DOES NOT EXIST.

AN ANSWER IN SCIENCE FOR ANYTHING TO DO WITH HOW LIFE FIRST STARTED.

So now you sulk off into your corner and you lick your wounds because you have NO ANSWER but GOD.  Your excuses are as pathetic as your claim to KNOW SCIENCE BECAUSE YOU TOOK A COURSE AND AN EXAM WHERE YOU WERE TOLD WHAT TO THINK NOT GIVEN EVIDENCE TO PROVE IT.

Clear now and so much better.  Seems science cannot give you what you need. TRUTH.

We might never know the exact pathways that led to life on this particular planet, but that doesn't justify us in inventing magic beliefs to cover that up. What we can do, and what we are doing, is investigating what happens between chemistry and biology, how we get from one to the other, filling in the gaps in our knowledge.

[Maeght]

TELL US HOW LIFE STARTED?

No one knows.

SHOW US THE EVIDENCE THAT PROVES EVOLUTION IF FACT.

Don't be so lazy, look it up.

OH, YOU CAN'T THAT'S RIGHT.

I could but you wouldn't accept it nor understand it. Don't be so lazy, do some research and study. And try to work out what facts and theories mean in science.

NOW WHO REALLY NEEDS THE TRUTH EXPLAINING TO THEM?

You clearly.

YOU AND ALL WHO HIDE BEHIND SOMETHING THAT DOES NOT EXIST.

Talking to yourself now are we?

AN ANSWER IN SCIENCE FOR ANYTHING TO DO WITH HOW LIFE FIRST STARTED.

And repeating yourself when you have been told about this.

So now you sulk off into your corner and you lick your wounds

You think you've inflicted wounds? That's funny.

...because you have NO ANSWER but GOD.

If you have a belief in God then you will see God as an answer but that is down to belief. nothing else.

Your excuses are as pathetic as your claim to KNOW SCIENCE BECAUSE YOU TOOK A COURSE AND AN EXAM WHERE YOU WERE TOLD WHAT TO THINK NOT GIVEN EVIDENCE TO PROVE IT.

You clearly don't understand how a university education works. Another thing to add to your list.

Clear now ...

You've certainly made your lack of knowledge and discussion skills a lot clearer, yes, thanks.

..and so much better.

What is?

Seems science cannot give you what you need. TRUTH.

It answers questions about the physical world around us, which we all need.

[Walter]

We might never know the exact pathways that led to life on this particular planet, but that doesn't justify us in inventing magic beliefs to cover that up. What we can do, and what we are doing, is investigating what happens between chemistry and biology, how we get from one to the other, filling in the gaps in our knowledge.

Torri
don't waste your typing finger , she's not worth engaging with.