I can prove the existance of God. Right now.

perfect image to prove a point.... dang i wish it would stop moving

 

pseudo science

 

Science sets out to make sense out of everything but when it comes to shit that is not known and never will be known, they feel the need to attach some bogus theory onto it anyway.


I think you have science confused with religion, and maybe you should look up the definition of theory.

 

I can prove the existence of ???

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/science/14rna.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

 

Haha....I was able to make it stop moving. Does that mean it's possible to see things clearly?

 

but you really have to try ... don't you

 

Yeah, I have a headache now.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lc6U7_-BeGc&feature=related

 

true.
strong atheist but too lazy to type all of that.
beatutifully said

 

If you smacked a wall for an infinite amount of time, your hand would eventually fall through the wall because of the alignment of the atoms. Same principle. On Earth, there was a given situation for several billion years. Whether it was the theory organic matter first developed in bubbles in the ocean or on the backs of crystals, it's more likely than not that life arose in those situations.

The right circumstances were there and the possibility was there. It'd be more surprising if life didn't arise. Probability is a crazy thing.

 

your a fool, and if you cant go back and read this and be embarrased, your even more of a fool. This statement is everything thats wrong with modern religion.

 

monkeyboy, your sig makes me sad

 

i would much more believe that god had a roommate named steve and when playing poker one night with him god let out a really nasty fart and the big bang formed from his ass. you can thank seth macfarlane for that one.

 

Fail.

 

Here's how to solve this problem, stop looking for purpose, purpose came after our existence.

 

How about everyone stops trying to prove their belief. They wait until they die and enjoy whatever comes after that; whatever it may be.

 

good point, physics are a solid study, religion is a soft study

 

Well, people should be able to discuss their beliefs if they want. No one has to convert or be convinced but people still have the right to discuss, same goes for the right to not conform.

If we don't particularly enjoy what is being discussed, we can always go on to another topic.

 

Originally Posted by relaxxx
"It's sad how so many people have absolutely no insight as to how life developed. We know how life developed."

Except it's simply not accurate to say that we know how life began. For a long time atheists told us confidently that it began in "some warm little pond with all sorts of amonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, etc." (Darwin) or in the ocean, in a "primordial soup" of chemicals (Haldane). In the 1950s, after Urey and Miller synthesized amino acids in the laboratory from a primordial soup using the Darwin-Haldane recipe, the case seemed to be closed.

But not so fast. Geologists no longer believe that the early earth atmosphere was similar to the Urey-Miller soup recipe. Fossils of early microbial life are nearly as old as the oldest rocks, making it extremely improbable that life occurred from a chance mixing of chemicals. The odds of producing just protein by chance are something like 1 to the forty thousandth power. Even the simplest microbial life forms have DNA programming of extraordinary complexity, and the interdependence between DNA (software) and proteins (hardware) presents a "chicken and egg" problem (which may be partially avoided by the "RNA world" theory). Moreover, early life forms on the surface of the earth would be highly vulnerable to cosmic radiation and comets. Of course there are alternative theories: "it came from outer space", developing on some other planet and hitching a ride on a meteor or being bio-engineered and disseminated by aliens. Or it developed far beneath the surface of the earth in a volcanic or deep-sea hydrothermal vent (more like hell than Eden), as a heat-loving brimstone eating microbe like Pyrodictium.

A major point of contention among scientists is whether life was a fluke, as biologists Stephen Jay Gould and Jacques Monod maintain, or whether the laws of nature are slanted in favor of life, as biochemist Christian de Duve and physicist Stuart Kaufman contend. If the latter, Relaxx will have to endure years more of Christians crowing that it all must be a result of ID.

 

It doesn't matter if life developed in the swamp, ocean, underground, on another planet or in a cloud of gas 5 billion light years wide. What matters is that it is infinitely more likely that it developed from unconscious natural properties of energy and not some divine consciousness. We KNOW this because consciousness is without a doubt an extremely complex state and complexity is a product of time and energy. Consciousness does not exist at any level in a state of singularity, it does not exist at any level in a propagation sine wave, it does not exist at any level across light years or even light seconds. Consciousness, awareness, thought, creation from thought exist only as highly complex interaction of billions of parts working together as they EVOLVED to do over billions of years to create a state far greater than the sum total of it's parts.

BTW the earth is like 10 billion years older than the oldest known rocks.