You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

90% agree
10% disagree
Post

I struggled with this for awhile, but people that go about killing in the name of God is cultural Christianity. Authentic Christianity, "Know God, know peace" can be seen in the ministry of Jesus and his disciples! :)

+11 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

43% agree
57% disagree
Post

God isn't fictional though, there is scientific evidence that points towards intelligent design (the big bang theory, anyone?) and many "pillars of atheism" for example Charles Darwin's tree of Life, Haeckel's embryos, the Stanley Miller Experiment, or the "missing link" the archaeopteryx have either not been proven as true, or been proved false.

0 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

41% agree
59% disagree
Post

The BBT doesn't even pertain to the Origin of the Universe. It basically states that matter was dense and hot and it is now less dense and less hot. Scientists even concede that they cannot prove how we got the matter that was around before the "Big Bang"

0 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

32% agree
68% disagree
Post

Karma in the very simplistic sense of good deed gets eye for an eye reward, bad deed gets eye for an eye punnishment.

011 Reply

Chiff Chiff

In response to “Karma in the very simplistic sense of good...

I'm aware of what karma asserts, but why did you post about it? No one said anything about karma.

+11 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

32% agree
68% disagree
Post

Karma is a quaint and ridiculous notion.

-415 Reply

Chiff Chiff

In response to “Karma is a quaint and ridiculous notion.

Who said anything about karma? The post said "she will pay for whatever she did in an afterlife" Karma is a notion that has to deal with reincarnation, and the term "an afterlife" doesn't necessarily point to Hinduism. This person could have simply meant that on Judgement Day Casey Anthony, like the rest of us, will be judged by what we have done.

+44 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

52% agree
48% disagree
Post

granted, in some occasions, the cambrian explosion especially, more may have been at work than simple natural selection. nevertheless, once land ecosystems and the like were present and had begun to equilibrate, natural selection would have taken over. in the short term, natural selection has been observed to occur, so i ope you wouldn't dispute its existence entirely.

i am curious though, how would you go about explaining the cambrian phenomenon?

0 Reply

yddraigarian yddraigarian

In response to “granted, in some occasions, the cambrian...

I think small scale natural selection has occurred, but I've seen no evidence that supports the assumption that large scale natural selection has occurred.
Pertaining to the Cambrian explosion, I believe it points towards intelligent design. There are animals that we have fossils of that don't have ancestors like Darwinism says they should. There are also irreducibly complex small celled organisms that are around that can only function as a complete whole. Darwinism states that beings must occur and then evolve to their surroundings, but an irreducibly complex organism can only survive with all of their parts.

I think that for the most part origin of life science, geology, and other sciences actually support intelligent design.

0 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

52% agree
48% disagree
Post

ah. well you confused me by asking what proof i had that storks actually delivered babies, based on the thread.

it seems that an incomplete dossil record is becoming now what "because the bible says so" used to to be in such debates - yes it may be true, yes it may cause one side to believe they have the high ground, but in the end it can be explaned away. if everything that ever lived got fossilized you wouldn't be a ble to grow tomatoes in your back yard for all the mineralized bone in the way.

0 Reply

yddraigarian yddraigarian

In response to “ah. well you confused me by asking what proof...

What you say about fossilized evidence is true. But what about the Cambrian explosion, which contrary to Darwinian Evolution, is the rapid change and rapid appearance of new types of life and life forms that are drastically different than anything that we had before hand.

We have soft tissued fossils before the explosion and after.
The Cambrian explosion is too big to be explained away by a guess that we don't have fossils that would validate Darwin's theory. People that are against Darwin's theory have concrete proof that it does not occur the way Darwin thought. Darwin even conceded that the fossil record does not support his assertions.

The burden of proof is on Darwinists, and until they can supply the world with sufficient fossil records to connect what we have post Cambrian explosion to what we had pre Cambrian explosion, I refuse to believe in such fairy tales.

0 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

52% agree
48% disagree
Post

looney tunes.

+11 Reply

yddraigarian yddraigarian

In response to “looney tunes.

I was just trying to ask a scientific question, I'm not going to say that evolution didn't happen or doesn't happen, but I will say that Darwinian evolution doe's not happen and the fossil record has shown it doesn't happen. I wont say that the Big Bang didn't happen but I will say that the Big Bang theory is about the universe's expansion and doe's not account for the mass singularity that caused the Big Bang

0 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

33% agree
67% disagree
Post

Yes, it happens very slowly.

0 Reply

iamrite iamrite

In response to “Yes, it happens very slowly.

Biologically speaking, it does happen very slowly. So explain the Cambrian explosion

0 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

52% agree
48% disagree
Post

No. If you are a creationist, you believe that God put Adam and Eve on the world. They were humans. The dominant species is still humans. If you are an evolutionist, you believe life started at some point with one single cleed organism. It then reproduced and evloved into all the different species of the world.

+341 Reply

technon

In response to “No. If you are a creationist, you believe...

What evidence do you have that we all originate from single celled organisms?

Please only respond with scientific evidence... tests that have been run, experiments that have been proven conclusive, etc.

0 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

56% agree
44% disagree
Post

I am both sane, and well-educated.

But what do you define evolution as?

0 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

79% agree
21% disagree
Post

I can scientifically deny that Charles Darwin's "Tree of Life" is false if you'd like me to.

Micro evolution happens, we see that with dogs, horses and other animals that are bred for certain things.

But what Darwin theorized was decent with modification, that was very slow. But the Cambrian explosion was, geologically speaking, very very fast.

0 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

82% agree
18% disagree
Post

I'm not going to state my views on evolution.
But anyone claiming to be a Christian is not acting like one if they tell you that you're going to hell.

That's not authentic Christianity, and I hope that you meet some people that are authentic!

0 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

97% agree
3% disagree
Post

...except that they were actually right, just everyone THOUGHT they were wrong

0 Reply

Anonymous

In response to “except that they were actually right, just...

what do you mean Charles Darwin was right? His tree of life is a good depiction of his theory, but it's actually not accurate at all pertaining to what it asserts.

0 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

83% agree
17% disagree
Post

Nope, evolution is just true, its ridiculous that some people use his ideas to justify racism and the like.

0 Reply

AgaDoo

In response to “Nope, evolution is just true, its ridiculous...

What makes evolution true?

If you're talking about Darwin's tree of Life, you are mistaken.
The fossil record does not uphold what Darwin said. A key aspect to his theory is that natural selection would act "slowly by accumulating slight, successive, favorable variations" and that "no great or sudden modifications" were possible.

If you know about the fossil record, the Cambrian explosion was very abrupt. Geologist call it the "Biological Big Bang"

What are you saying, when you say "evolution is just true" ?

0 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

46% agree
54% disagree
Post

The theory of evolution has nothing to do with how the earth was made.

But if you're talking about "Darwin's Tree of Life" then yes it is rubbish.

The fossil record doesn't uphold what he said, and Darwin even knew that the fossil record failed to support his tree.

0 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

88% agree
12% disagree
Post

You said there was no scientific evidence for the big bang theory. That is completely incorrect. Generally, when people use absolutes like that, they don't deserve much respect. There is an abundance of evidence for the BBT, and information in that link directly addresses everything you say in a more succinct way than I could ever hope to. You, on the other hand, have no physical evidence to back you up. You assert without proof that some sort of God created the universe, and what is asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof, although I deigned to give you some anyways. The most prominent problem with your idea is that you state that everything must have a creator and then fail to explain how He was created.

+44 Reply

Take2 Take2

In response to “You said there was no scientific evidence for...

I feel like I've given you ample time to respond and you've chosen not to, which is okay. But I feel that you must realize something.
My point was about the cause of the universe, the BBT does NOT pertain to the cause of the universe.

Did you take the time to ready the link you posted?
I don't think you did because it says, under "common misconceptions about the BB" and I quote "The BBT is not about the origin of the universe. Rather, its primary focus is the development of the universe over time."

Never did I assert that there is no scientific evidence for the BBT, you thought the BBT was an explanation for how the everything came into being.

0 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

88% agree
12% disagree
Post

You said there was no scientific evidence for the big bang theory. That is completely incorrect. Generally, when people use absolutes like that, they don't deserve much respect. There is an abundance of evidence for the BBT, and information in that link directly addresses everything you say in a more succinct way than I could ever hope to. You, on the other hand, have no physical evidence to back you up. You assert without proof that some sort of God created the universe, and what is asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof, although I deigned to give you some anyways. The most prominent problem with your idea is that you state that everything must have a creator and then fail to explain how He was created.

+44 Reply

Take2 Take2

In response to “You said there was no scientific evidence for...

Reasons why I am skeptical of the BBT:
1. Stephen Hawking cited that"if the rate of the universe's expansion one second after the BB had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, the universe would have collapsed into a fireball
2. British physicist P.C.W. Davies concluded the odds against the initial conditions being suitable for the formation of stars- a necessity for plants and thus life- is a one followed by at least a thousand billion billion zeroes.
Davies also estimate that if the strength of gravity, or of the weak force were changed by only one part in a ten followed by a hundred zeroes, life could never have developed.

I am not saying that the universe isn't the result of rapid expansion or the BBT, what I am saying is the odds, from what I have researched are too high for the universe's cause to be chaotic and not have an intelligent being behind it.

0 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

88% agree
12% disagree
Post

You said there was no scientific evidence for the big bang theory. That is completely incorrect. Generally, when people use absolutes like that, they don't deserve much respect. There is an abundance of evidence for the BBT, and information in that link directly addresses everything you say in a more succinct way than I could ever hope to. You, on the other hand, have no physical evidence to back you up. You assert without proof that some sort of God created the universe, and what is asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof, although I deigned to give you some anyways. The most prominent problem with your idea is that you state that everything must have a creator and then fail to explain how He was created.

+44 Reply

Take2 Take2

In response to “You said there was no scientific evidence for...

Science states that anything that begins to exist must have a cause. I, along with people believing in God assert that God was not caused and is transcendent, thus he has always existed and does not need a cause, and please don't say that I am making an exception for God, because Atheist used to assert that the universe was eternal and uncaused.
As a person ascribing to the BBT you have to forgo some of your scientific beliefs to take it as believable. If you assert that the universe is finite, you must also assert that it came in to being, but from what you are saying. Something (the universe) came from nothing and by nothing.
Scientist Sir Arthur Eddington was quoted "The beginning seems to present insuperable difficulties unless we agree to look on it as frankly supernatural"

0 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

88% agree
12% disagree
Post

In response to “http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/astronomy/bigba...

send things like that all you'd, but at least do it in a respectful manner as I did.

In response to what you said, There is no law of physics that can create or destroy energy, which is scientific fact. So, for energy to come into existence it must be something that is outside the realm of science.
Not to mention that at one point in time space was a vacuum with nothing in it. Using scientific facts, I would like you to explain how an entire universe so finely tuned as the one we are blessed with came into existence.

-11 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

88% agree
12% disagree
Post

Though I concede there is not a numerically large difference between 0 and 1, I think the radical idea lies in the fact that many atheist believe the universe just came into being, as in it was caused but there is no scientific evidence for said cause. Science states that for anything to come into being there must be a cause, while religion asserts that an uncaused transcendent being happens to be this cause.
I think both view points are mutually unprovable, but that's just me.
Sorry if I came across as forward or rude, it was not my intention. I also apologize for any spelling or grammatical errors as I am on my iPhone.

-65111 Reply

ckwbeliever

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

89% agree
11% disagree
Post

really the long responses aren't necessary. i'm just saying i don't feel like further discussing this whether i'm wrong or not. and honestly, even if our founding fathers were theists, it doesn't matter cause we're still a secular nation. SECULAR NATION.
ki'mdonebye.

0 Reply

annikarosee

In response to “really the long responses aren't necessary...

I like how in America "we're still a secular nation. SECULAR NATION." when I refuted every point you posed. Just because you believe it to be true does not make it the case. When you are ready to look at facts about history objectively I suggest you find another source than a liberal high school civics teacher

0 Reply

ckwbeliever

Find out your friends' opinions

Amirite is the premier opinion-based social network where people from all around the world discover, debate and discuss today's hottest issues. Share your perspective to the world and interact with like-minded individuals on breaking news, hot topics and controversial issues now!

With that many angles, the discussions on Amirite will open your eyes to a panoramic view of your world that you won't get anywhere else, allowing you to see the big picture and discuss it.

Every opinion matters on Amirite.

Sign up to have your opinion heard!

It only takes a second.
Connect with Facebook, Twitter or Google.

or create an account with your email...

Sign Up Already Have An Account?

Login to your Amirite account...

Login Forgot Your Details? Need An Account?

Enter your email address and we'll email you your account details.

Send Details Back To Login Form

Login using...

Login

Forgotten username or password?
We'll send you your username and a new password.

Email Address

Login

Sign up to have your opinion heard!

Show posts as Grid List

By creating an account you indicate that you have read and agree to abide by our rules.

Create My Account