The debate "You can plan your life but the real and well planner is your god" was started by
April 4, 2015, 10:56 am.
49 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 85 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
mdavis1309 posted 1 argument, Faizap posted 2 arguments, ufufugh posted 6 arguments, Getmurked posted 8 arguments, evamara posted 1 argument to the agreers part.
PsychDave posted 15 arguments, project_mayhem posted 2 arguments, Mastermind posted 5 arguments, I_Voyager posted 1 argument, LondonLeaders posted 1 argument, irishstraw posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
ufufugh, Faizap, ArsonLarson, animegirlxx, ABDO, Getmurked, Raissa, HabibaKim, Gabrielle, judge, toughgamerjerry, Rhiannon09, ibrahim, WhyNot, evamara, action007man, denno27 and 32 visitors agree.
project_mayhem, Bodaciouslady16, mdavis1309, sickboyblonde, frozen_emily, DarkSkyz06, Hjkp98, I_Voyager, Kaitlyn56, PsychDave, Fountaine550, Jimmy_123, Mastermind, tommyg, danielle, daddyfantastic, Untamed, londonlightz, LondonLeaders, shinywhale, Tuv46, transfanboy, hardikrawat, YesOrNo, Shuttey, murch, MerciPol, marti, anonimderp, JMP9940, Shreedeep, sugoi_shan, jesusorgy, jonatron5, sighnomore99, skyfrancois_97, irishstraw, kyopsis23, soullesschicken, dylan21502 and 45 visitors disagree.
dears, I think you are a little confuse, what if God made the Big Bang, and the evolution and the viruses...??? what if He, the Lord of the world, just hopes that we all love him without proves??? Its called faith!!!! and pleace take a look of all the evidence that we have of God? just an example, go to google and search incorrupt bodies of saints. what courius, all the incorrupt bodies are from saints!!!
Fair enough and that is all anyone could reasonably ask.
i do see where you are coming from. however i would like to see if the theory can be proved indefinetly, but i will wait patiently until that day.
While there are certainly aspects of the Big Bang that are not fully understood, the amount of evidence is not comparable to religion. The theory of the Big Bang makes specific predictions that can be tested. There is experimental evidence that supports the Big Bang while religion is based on faith. There I is nothing wrong with that, but the supporting evidence between them is not even since only one relies on evidence.
As to what brings particles back together after an explosion in space, it is gravity. It isn't necessarily strong enough to pull them all back to the starting point without a massive object staying there to pull on them (like the Earth pulls on things exploding straight up) but it cam pull them into clumps. On Earth, the gravity of the planet pulls everything down, so they stop moving. In space, there is nothing to stop particles so, as they drift, they attract each other through gravity. As more particles collect in one place, there is more gravity to pull things from farther away. Over a long time, if there are enough particles, they can hit a critical point where the gravity gets strong enough to fuse hydrogen atoms into helium, igniting into a sun. We can see this in progress by looking at nebulae.
I do want to make it clear that I don't think you are ignorant. You have clearly shows that you are capable of critical thinking and that you have knowledge of different areas. If that is how my comments came across, I apologize. Everyone has different strengths and different knowledge bases. There is simply too much math that is too complex to get into in depth here. Added to that problem is that this is the bleeding edge if some area of physics, meaning that the math and theories that are being used are the most complex and have taken lifetimes to figure out. Without quite a bit of background, it is hard to give them sufficient context to make the numbers meaningful.
and i am nowhere near a scientist or anything like it, but i do not like to remain ignorant.
could you explain how an explosion that blast particles outward ans that come back together, as you have gone to the liberty of telling me, have created life?
that may be true, alot of informatiom has yet to be revealed, and outdatee sources should be discarded.
however, i have no idea what the future may hold, but it seems to me that the big bang is just a theory as of now, just like religion hasnt been proved. both are utterly different topics, but hold the same amount of evidence available. no where have i found among the vast internet a source stating that the big banf has been proved, or anything like it has ever such occurred that has been made known to us.
And as I said, I found the Donald Page you were referencing. He was a physicist, not an evolutionist, and his quote was taken out of context from a letter he wrote in response to am article. It was published in 1983. He was not arguing that the Big Bang had not occurred, just for a different theory of how it occurred.
If you don't know anything about him, how can you claim that a sentence you copied with no context supports your position? I could claim that the church's position on a heliocentric solar system shows that they have no understanding of how the universe works, but that would be using out of date information. The church has since admitted that they were wrong and apologized for trying people as heretics for saying Earth revolves around the sun. That is why outdated references are flawed. You are arguing with perspectives that people don't necessarily still hold and claiming victory based on missing evidence that may have been found since. The difference is that scientists will admit when they are wrong and move on in search of the truth, while religions will cling to dogma for hundreds of years after it has been disproven.
I haven't addressed all of the arguments made because unless you have a far more advanced understanding of physics than you have thus far shown, explanations would be incomprehensible. You are asking me to explain, in a few words, research that has taken decades for some of the best minds in the world. It can't be done. Can you explain in simple terms what you are even asking for with regards to radiation temperature? The article claims there is still debate about its existence and measurability, this is not the case.
It is outdated because the references are old, that's what outdated means. By using old research, the writer can ignore research that has been done in the last decade. Do you honestly not think technology has progressed in a decade? Better technology means better, more accurate measurement, leading to more accurate results. By ignoring the majority of research and taking quotes out of context, the writer has intentionally biased the article.
I don't know if God exists or not. If God does exist, I refuse to believe that he gave us logic, rational thought and intellect and then expected us to ignore them.
are you suggesting hes not real? you think he was merely made up? i cant answer who he is, but just because you cant find him doesnt mean he isnt legit, he just may not be popular at all.
yes, i have done extensive research upon that site among others, but i wanted to see what you would say to thier arguments on that site, which i feel you havent addressed too well.
how is it outdated? i have compared articles and clearly it states that the big bang could not have happened or even produce life. if such a thing happened how has it not happenee again? why did this randomly occur at one point of time? wheres thw real evidence that this THEORY happened. a theory that you place all your assets and beliefs upon, a theory.
So I found Donald Page by tracking down the Christian Courier article you are copy and pasting from. I can't find too much more about him other than the abstract that the quote is taken from since it was written in a letter to Nature (the magazine) in 1983. In fact, there is no scientific journal references more recent than 1993 in the entire article (though they reference one of their own articles published in 2003). The quote also appears to have been badly taken out of context as he was in no way supporting creationism, and was actually a physicist from Pennsylvania State University, not an evolutionist.
The references to radiation temperature are referring to the universal background microwave radiation. I will let you do your own research using modern papers as references, but we have progressed beyond what is discussed in that article. Going into it involves a great deal of math and this forum is not well suited to that.
And Wikipedia pulls up the physicist, a politician, and a footballer.
As to Donald Page, could you site some of his work, an interview with him, or anything else that let's me find his work? I have tried to Google search and have found a physicist by the same name, but nothing about an evolutionist by that name.
When an explosion happens in space, particles react differently than on Earth since there is nothing for them to hit to stop them. After the big bang, particles spread out randomly. Over time, gravity started pulling them together, resulting in clumps. As things are pulled together, there is almost always going to be some momentum in another direction, resulting in spin. Picture two lumps of clay smacking into each other. The odds of them hitting perfectly and coming to a dead stop are very low. It is more likely that they don't quite hit square and the spin as a result. Obviously this is a vast oversimplification, but hopefully it illustrates where the spin comes from. The birth of stars, planets and other celestial bodies is only theoretical since it's hard to make giant balls of nuclear fusion in the lab, but the principles are fairly well understood.
As to the radiation temperature of the universe, that I will need to do some research into and get back to you.
also,if the big bang were true, there should be a correlation between the material compostion of the universe( since everything emits thermal heat) and the corresponding radiation temperature, but such is not the case.
donald page is an evolutionist.
as for it being so orderly, it is. look around you, look at the chances that we spawned on the one planet that has life? and how we may mot be perfect but we have everything we need.
i also feel you have not addressed my argument of how an explosiom caused life, you only denied it. when the universe started with an explosiom, one would expect that all matter-energy should have been propelled radially from the explosiom center-consistent with the prinicple of angular momentum. it would not be expected that the universe would be characterized by the curvimg and orbiting motions that are commonly observed(e.g. the revolution of our earth around the sun)
That is so stupid!
God helps those who helps themself. If you want to go far in life you make that happen because it is YOUR life and the only person in control of it is you.
That is true, science cannot disprove that God created everything. The problem is that it is a circular argument that has no way to prove or disprove it. I could make other claims for creation and we have no way to prove anything either way.
In my argument I was referencing the cult of the flying spaghetti monster. It was created as a response to intelligent design's claim that scientists couldn't prove that God didn't create everything. They counterclaimed that there is a spaghetti monster flying in space. Space is large enough, and bowls of spaghetti small enough, that there is no way we could see it from Earth, so there's no way to disprove it.
If I say everything is his creation then science do not exclude from that.
In order to give reply for your argument it has to be clear.Whom you are referring as monster? the god?
You may need to reread my comment. I wasn't saying you would give up. I was saying that based on your comments I expect you to continue to profess your faith without contributing anything to the debate. I am not trying to change your mind, as I don't particularly care what you believe. I debate to present logical, reasoned arguments so that people reading through them can make their own, hopefully informed, decision about the topic.
You are welcome to your faith and I don't criticize you for having it. I do not feel that personal faith is a form of proof of a concept because people often believe things that are simply not true. Most young people are convinced that they are immortal, racists believe that they are morally correct in their attacks on those they hate, and children believe in the tooth fairy and Santa Clause. Some of these beliefs are harmful, some are not, but the belief doesn't make them true. Belief in God is not on any way bad in itself. It does become harmful when it is used to justify intolerance and violence, and when it stands in the way of learning more about the world we live in. Galileo was persecuted for saying the Earth revolved around the sun, and it took hundreds of years for the Catholic Church to apologize. When scientific evidence contradicts religious dogma, it has historically not been science that was proved wrong. Believe in God if you wish, but do not try to impede science and learning.
I am guessing you mean Donald Page the physicist, but I can't seem to find that particular quote anywhere. Could you provide a link or some information about the interview. I do see that he did research under Steven Hawking (who supports the big bang) and has studied black holes, so it seems out of character to say the least.
As to your comparison to an explosion on a print shop, that is a very flawed analogy. The big bang scattered everything chaotically. Over time, gravity pulled things back together in clumps making galaxies made of stars. We have a good understanding of that process from looking at nebulae (clouds of gas in space that come together to form stars). We also have an understanding of the gradual increase in complexity of life through purely natural processes.
Finally, how do you define the universe to operate purposefully? Most of the planet is hostile to human life, much of it is covered in water, and other parts are unlivable from the cold. There is only one planet with an atmosphere able to support life, and immense amounts of empty space to move between celestial bodies. While we can predict the paths of the bodies in space, that is based on basic momentum and gravity, not miraculous intervention. What part of a universe that is almost completely hostile to life strikes you as ordered and purposeful?
For your kind information I'am not going to give up .My belief is not as much weak that your useless thoughts which can only make you satisfied can't change it.Nothing but he only can change our mortality.
how so? how could it have created life and everything so perfectly? an explosion in a print shop does not produce an encyclopedia. never before in all of human history has such an explosion been observed producing an intricate order that operarates so purposefully.
an evolutionist by the name of donald page said "there is no mechanism known as yet that would allow the universe to begin in an arbitrary state and then evolve to its present highly ordered state
If the spaghetti monster isnt real, then explain to me why all the planets are perfectly shapped like meatballs?
That is a very convenient, and useless, argument to use in a debate. "I know I have no proof, and that you will never agree, but I'm still going to spout platitudes until you give up."
No evidence is need to prove his existence. The wold itself is the proof.
I would be a fool if I tried to change you as I know I know you are not going to change.God decides who has to follow him and who not.
By your logic I could claim that you were created by a spaghetti monster. Everything was created so that the spaghetti monster could express it's love. Everything perfect and imperfect was created by the spaghetti monster. So for you to deny the blessings the mighty spaghetti monster has bestowed upon you only shows how imperfect you are.
Your argument is circular with no proof of any of its claims.
well you a creature of god living in his earth denying the god. Think at a once is it difficult for him to create you or the other creatures he had created. If he had created the universe the maintenance is nothing for him.
You in between of every blessings from him and only looking to the imperfect things.It tells me how much imperfect you are. Every perfect and imperfect things are his creation so you are his creation.
Nobody knows why the big bang happened. But any form of complexity can be explained by the natural laws. You don't need a God to understand them. The explanations are usually complex, but they explain the final result without the need to assume the existence of a God.
Well the universe is not exactly perfect.
The complexity of organized life? It's a result of a constant series of disorganized natural processes, for one. For another, it also has it's flaws and problems here and there, wgich is why you have diseases and disorders, even at birth.
The fine-tuning of life in the universe? It took 13 billion years since the universe formed for it to get to where it is today. Given how the universe works, this sort of complexity was bound to pop up at some point. And 13 billion years isn't short enough for you to say the universe was finely tuned for this.
maybe it doesnt. but how could all this just be a random accident? everything is so complex and organized, how could you believe its a mere coincidence that some big bang mysteriously happened? and that everything was created perfectly and so organized just randomly?
And nothing is simple implies that you're ignorant of how nature works. It doesn't imply that God exists.
The religious like their Pascal's Wager. But I ask you, what if YOU are wrong? What if we have an economic maximum amount of output for health living here on earth, and by fully pursuing a non-religious scientific/economic approach we could expand out of the earth and harvest the energy of the galaxy to remain alive as a species, and then eventually master the dimensional forces and EXCEED them, becoming transient beings ourselves. But because we keep relying on ancient holy books to repeatedly lie to us about life, we just waste all our days here on earth praying til nature gives us back to the unliving entropy of the universe?
Then religion would have brought about the end of man, and for no good reason, and would have been the greatest evil force on earth. And would you think that under those conditions you would deserve forgiveness for failing your species?
Mr, Mastermind I don't think you have a master mind or in fact a mind enough to think. If you have then think ,look around you. Look at you. Nothing is so simple ! Nothing is so simple that any man itself can build this world or in a sudden movement the world came to exist. You can oppose me scientifically but let me tell you that everything is his creations. I mean everything...All the things the sky ,the earth , and everything between them and its outside are made by him. Wait for the judgement day but that would be the day to regret .
The reason as to why proving a small no. of its claims won't help you generalize to the rest is because the rest can easily be false.
For example: "The sky is a near vacuum. The sun is a ball of fire."
Those two statements are written in the same comment. The former is actually true but the latter isn't (the sun is a ball of multiple nuclear fission of molecules, which is different from fire).
Is every word of the comment true simply because one of its claims are true? No.
How do you even know we are "creations of God", as you claim we are? Citing a holy scriptute won't prove your point btw. You first are required to justify why the scripture is a reliable source of true information. For example, science textbooks are to an extent since they provide experiments that would prive their claims. Math textbooks have their claims justified by logical means.
How do you know the words of your scripture are true? Proving that a small no. of its claims are true also won't prove that all of its claims are true.
Oh dont you worry Faizap. Remember God doesnt work like that. He waits until they die then sends them to be tortured for all of eternity . Not having a tongue doesn't sound that bad anymore now does it?
What is wrong with this world, the creations of god disagree his existence?
You are talking against him and there is no doubt if he take any action against you then there would be no tongue to talk against him.
If God exists, he gave humans free will to be able to decide their own course. If not he obviously can't be planning our lives.
god exists and I can challenge you for that .
Gods don't exist, you decide where your life goes.