[N0help4u]

Yeah you can't prove that something doesn't exist

[Capuchin]

Yeah you can't prove that something doesn't exist

That wasn't the point he was making.

[N0help4u]

:D the point I was making

[Credendovidis]

"You can't prove that something doesn't exist".

It all depends on WHAT does not exist. And WHERE that does not exist.
If you mean the existence of God, and you describe God as being fixed to heaven and add a couple of restricting parameters (as for instance where that heaven should be located), than it is possible to prove that God does not exist by simply going to that location and finding that on that spot there is no heaven - so there can be no God.

But as Christians can not even specify where heaven should be located, and also can not guarantee that God is restricted to that heaven, there are so many unknowns build in to the God existence claim, that it become impossible to prove God does not exist.

There is no need to prove that God does not exist. Why should anybody want to do that? It are the Christians who can not even prove that God exists. And that on itself is already more than enough for me to support the view that the existence of God is extremely doubtful, and so far has failed any support.

:rolleyes:

·

[lobrobster]

:D the point I was making

My last point in this thread because this is starting to get silly.

You seem to think that because something can neither be proven nor falsified that this necessarily means there is a 50/50 chance it is true. Either there is a God or there's not, right? 50/50... But this is a HUGE error in logic! It shouldn't take much thinking on your part to see why. Good luck with it.

[sassyT]

More bull manure ... I never stated that what is called the Big Bang is a fact. I stated that there is a lot of objective supporting evidence for the flash expansion that in popular terms is called "the Big Bang".
This in stark contrast to the total lack of any objective supporting evidence for the religious creation claim.

Why do you always try to twist everything and/or tamper with quotations by making false suggestions as to what was really stated? Perhaps because you can not support your own religious wild claims ?

:rolleyes:

·

At least I am rational enough to admit that there is no 100% factual evidence for my beliefs. Unlike you who sends mixed messages... you admit the is insufficient evidence to qualify the big bang theory as fact but when I say you BELIEVE in the big bang you start to friek out and say you don't "believe" you 'Know" it is a fact... lol

So until you man up and admit you BELIEVE in a Big Bang, I will continue to ask you for factual evidence for a big bang. ;)

[Credendovidis]

So until you man up and admit you BELIEVE in a Big Bang, i will continue to ask you for factual evidence for a big bang.

A lot of bull waste, sassyT !
I do not believe in what is popularly called the Big Bang. There is no need to believe that, as there is ample evidence that the BB happened, about 14,3 Billion years ago. Lot's of different cross supporting evidence for that.
Note : the Big Bang was NOT a gigantic explosion. It was a phenomenal fast, very short, and sudden expansion of space-time.

It is YOU who keeps twisting words. I never claimed the Big Bang to be a huge explosion, nor that is is a fact. I always have stated that there is a lot of objective supporting evidence that the BB happened, though there never will be a 100% total coverage of everything that was involved in that event.

It is YOU who keeps stating that I believe in the BB, although so far you have never been able to objectively support that wild claim.

It is YOU who keeps posting lies and untruths about what I posted in the past. I have repeatedly corrected you when you posted such lies and untruths. Still you keep posting them.

sassyT : you have claimed several times to have some sort of degree in Biology. I asked you where and when you obtained that degree. You never addressed that. So I have to assume that that was another lie...
Your approach to the ways scientific research works, and to how scientific evidence is obtained and supported seems also to confirm my assumption...

:D :D :D :D :D

·

[sassyT]

[QUOTE]

A lot of bull waste, sassyT !
I do not believe in what is popularly called the Big Bang. There is no need to believe that, as there is ample evidence that the BB happened, about 14,3 Billion years ago. Lot's of different cross supporting evidence for that.

You are really confusing me now.. :confused: So what do you BELIEVE in? How do you figure we came into being?

.

It is YOU who keeps twisting words. I never claimed the Big Bang to be a huge explosion, nor that is is a fact. I always have stated that there is a lot of objective supporting evidence that the BB happened, though there never will be a 100% total coverage of everything that was involved in that event.

It is YOU who keeps stating that I believe in the BB, although so far you have never been able to objectively support that wild claim.

It is YOU who keeps posting lies and untruths about what I posted in the past. I have repeatedly corrected you when you posted such lies and untruths. Still you keep posting them.

You don't have to be ashamed of your belief in a big bang now. You did say life came from a big bang and now you are changing your statement because you realise how ridiculous the theory is. Whatever :rolleyes:

sassyT : you have claimed several times to have some sort of degree in Biology. I asked you where and when you obtained that degree. You never addressed that. So I have to assume that that was another lie...
Your approach to the ways scientific research works, and to how scientific evidence is obtained and supported seems also to confirm my assumption...

Again that is your BELIEF which has no materal effect on the fact that I am doing my masters in Biology. Unlike you I am aware of all the unknowable assuptions used in sceintific theory and therefore I do not believe it to be TRUTH as you do. So just because I do not share the same FAITH you have in the unproven assuptions of some theories, does not make me less of a science major. :rolleyes:

[N0help4u]

Like I said Cred doesn't want to answer what he believes just what he does not believe on existence.

[michealb]

I'll tell you what I think. Again this is what I think and I maintain that thinking is different than believing because if evidence is presented that is contrary to what I think I will change my ideas.

I think the big bang is the best model of the universe to explain the way it is today.
I think evolution is the best model to explain how you get from a single cell to a more complex organism.
I think that we currently don't have a theory with enough evidence to claim a definitive theory on abiogenesis. I think we will have one some day though.
If we find new evidence or someone comes up with a different theory that better explains the evidence I might change what I think. Ideas change in the face of evidence. That is the great thing about ideas is that they can change.

[sassyT]

I'll tell you what I think. Again this is what I think and I maintain that thinking is different than believing because if evidence is presented that is contrary to what I think I will change my ideas.

I think the big bang is the best model of the universe to explain the way it is today.
I think evolution is the best model to explain how you get from a single cell to a more complex organism.
I think that we currently don't have a theory with enough evidence to claim a definitive theory on abiogenesis. I think we will have one some day though.
If we find new evidence or someone comes up with a different theory that better explains the evidence I might change what I think. Ideas change in the face of evidence. That is the great thing about ideas is that they can change.

Good for you!

I think The Big bang is a Hoax given that there are many scientific problems with the theory.

I think evolution is a farce given the strugling fossil evidence and the fact that a not single mutation resulting in adding new information has ever been observed in nature or in a lab. This is just one of the many unproven assuption the theory depends on.

[michealb]

good for you!

I think The Big bang is a Hoax given that there are many scientific problems with the theory.

I think evolution is a farce given the strugling fossil evidence and the fact that a not single mutation resulting in adding new information has ever been observed in nature or in a lab. This is just one of the many unproven assuption the theory depends on.

How can the big bang be a hoax? Are you trying to say that the scientist aren't observing what they say they are observing and scientists world wide are all going along with it. I can also say that there isn't a single scientific problem with the big bang because if there was the theory would be altered so it didn't have any problems that how theories work. There might be unknowns which when they become known might change the theory but it's still a good idea to theorize even in the event of unknowns. Also what is the alternate theory that you prefer given the evidence at hand?

Bacteria make major evolutionary shift in the lab - life - 09 June 2008 - New Scientist
Now that evolution has occurred in a lab are you going to change your line of thinking?

[N0help4u]

Cred says he does not believe in the big bang so it doesn't sound like people who follow science can even agree.

Compliments of the supporting evidence post by Cred:

No. I neither believe in the Big Bang, nor in a Big Bang that made "us".
Note : I NEVER have even suggested that "we" are made by a Big Bang ....
Why you suggest that cr*p I do not know, but it shows perfectly the retarded basis of your wild claims.

:D ;) :p :rolleyes: :D

·

[Credendovidis]

You are really confusing me now.. :confused: So what do you BELIEVE in? How do you figure we came into being?

I have no religious beliefs. But if you insist on an answer I would say that my personal preference goes to logic and ratio.

You don't have to be ashamed of your belief in a big bang now.

Why would I be ashamed of my personal preference? I do not believe in "a" Big Bang.

You did say life came from a big bang and now you are changing your statement because you realise how ridiculous the theory is.

A total lie : I have never stated that. I challenge you to state where and when I posted that : you can't !!!!

Re. sassyT's claims to have a degree in Biology.

Again that is your BELIEF which has no materal effect on the fact that I am doing my masters in Biology.

You repeatedly stated in May 2008 that you HAD a degree in Biology. So you lied than. And you frequently lie here too, and besides that you keep twisting words, post untruths, and make false statements.

:D ;) :p :rolleyes: :D

·

[N0help4u]

Did she specify masters?


SOME OTHER types of biology degrees
Associate degree, biology Minor, bachelor of Arts in Biology, Bachelor of Science in Biology

[Credendovidis]

Cred says he does not believe in the big bang so it doesn't sound like people who follow science can even agree.

There is not one single scientist or well-informed amateur (like me) who BELIEVES in the Big Bang.

Belief is related to assumptions for which there is no support at all - like religious claims.
Science is based on verifiable and objective supportive data , i.e. in facts.

:D :D :D :D :D

·

[N0help4u]

Michaelb's argument is that the big bang did exist and you claim otherwise that is my point

***correction: is how he fits his sciencifically inclined beliefs to the earths existence
STILL it is two different beliefs based on scientific beliefs

I'll tell you what I think. Again this is what I think and I maintain that thinking is different than believing because if evidence is presented that is contrary to what I think I will change my ideas.

I think the big bang is the best model of the universe to explain the way it is today.
I think evolution is the best model to explain how you get from a single cell to a more complex organism.
I think that we currently don't have a theory with enough evidence to claim a definitive theory on abiogenesis. I think we will have one some day though.
If we find new evidence or someone comes up with a different theory that better explains the evidence I might change what I think. Ideas change in the face of evidence. That is the great thing about ideas is that they can change.

[Credendovidis]

Did she specify masters?

She stated that she HAD a degree in Biology. SO SHE LIED!!

:rolleyes:

·

[Credendovidis]

michaelb's argument is that the big bang did exist and you claim otherwise that is my point

Incorrect. You either can not read or you have comprehension problems.
He clearly stated :
I'll tell you what I think.
Again this is what I think...
I think the big bang is...
I think evolution is...
I think that we currently...

Conclusion : he never stated that the Big Bang did exist or that evolution is... He clearly mentioned 5 X that he thinks that...
Note : to think is NOT the same as "it is".

:rolleyes:

·

[sassyT]

[QUOTE]

I have no religious beliefs. But if you insist on an answer I would say that my personal preference goes to logic and ratio.

Okey so based on your "logic" and "ratio" how did the universe and life come into being?

Why would I be ashamed of my personal preference? I do not believe in "a" Big Bang.

So you believe in THE big bang :confused:

You repeatedly stated in May 2008 that you HAD a degree in Biology. So you lied than. And you frequently lie here too, and besides that you keep twisting words, post untruths, and make false statements.

I have a bachelors degree DUH!
:rolleyes: