Richard asks…
Prove me wrong Atheists, God does exist?
God does exist. For proof please read below:
The Laws of science states they were always there and cannot be change. Evolution without a God states nothing exploded and made everything. This is extremely unscientific because it breaks many scientific laws of nature, including the Laws of Conservation of Energy and Mass.
The Laws of Conservation of Energy and Mass are the two basic laws of science that you will study in an academic science class in high school because all reactions, whether it be simple as turning a light on/off or burning a piece of paper on fire, follows these laws. The theory of evolution breaks these two laws making it 100% impossible to happen without a God because evolution without a God claims that nothing created everything from nothing naturally. This is impossible because mass and energy cannot be made or destroyed; only converted. Since cosmic evolution, the first part of evolution that attempts to explain existence, claims that nothing exploded and created two elements that later evolved into the other elements violates these laws. So it is impossible to happen without a God.
However, these are not the only things that disprove evolution that states man evolved from animals. The lack of evidence for evolution is overwhelming. There are many considerable differences between animals and humans, there are no links that showing animals evolved from one kind to another, and there is no observation or test showing nonliving things, such as Hydrogen or Helium atoms, can produce cellular life. In fact Charles Darwin once stated that if evolution is true there will have to be hundreds of thousands of fossils showing the evolving state of animals turning into different kinds of animals over time.
The Judo-Christian God of the Bible is the One and True God because He is the only God that has with stood the test of time, science, history, and prophecies of the Bible. This can be seen through the Dead Sea Scrolls that were written over 2000 years ago; proving that it with stood the test of time because it matches up word-for-word of the Hebrew Bible today. Verses such as Leviticus 17:14 stating “For it is the life of all flesh; the blood of it is for the life thereof: therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh: for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof: whosoever eateth it shall be cut off.” and Isaiah 40:22 stating “It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:”. These verses in the Bible are proven to be scientifically true thousands of years after they were written! The Israelites being enslaved to the Egyptians 3000 years ago and the Israelites spending 40 years in the desert is historically accurate proving that the Bible stands the test of history. And the test of prophecy is being fulfilled right now by the world leaders discussing and making plans how on they, the leaders of the world, are able to unite the world through a global government and economy. This is written in the Bible in verse of Revelation 13:7 “And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.” and in Revelation 13:16-17 “And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.”.
After looking over all the evidence for life’s existence, it is only possible that only a God could have created the universe and all the life that is in it.
admin answers:
Sweet Coyote, you can string all those words together, yet have no idea what you’re talking about.
There is no such thing as “the laws of science”. There are specific laws which refer to scientific principles, but you seem to fail to understand they only apply to the Universe in which we live.
The Big Bang was the inciting cause for our Universe, and if you actually bothered to do very much research about it, you would discover that a) nowhere does it state that “nothing exploded into everything”, and b) that the fundamental forces of our Universe, much like the fundamental material for our Universe, existed in a unified state, making any distinctions you tried to make using our current standards utterly meaningless.
As for the Law of Conservation of Mass and Energy, do you have some proof that it has ever been violated, or that anything in science suggests it has been? Bear in mind the Universe is a closed system, so that particular law only applied once the system was closed… Hence it has only applied SINCE the Big Bang, and we have nothing to suggest it has been violated since then.
Second, do your research before making declarations about paleontology. There aren’t any fossils showing animals evolving from one kind to another? Seriously? Start with the theraspids, work through the eucynodonts, and continue on through archaeopteryx and tiktaalik. Those cover the high order fossils for the transition from reptile to mammal, reptile to bird, and fish to amphibian.
And who is the Judo-Christian god, might I ask? Is he some famous martial artist Bruce Lee god we just weren’t aware was tooling around ancient Judea? It’s Judeo-Christian… But let’s do it.
Let’s see… Is the the only God that has withstood the test of time? Well, there is Lord Shiva. He’s still worshiped by nearly a billion people, and he was around before the Hebrew god was. There’s also Uhura Mazda, who is said to be the first monotheistic god, and Zoroastrianism is still alive and well, so you’ve failed to make your case on that front. Other gods have withstood the test of time.
Has he withstood scientific scrutiny? Well, there’s no proof he even exists, but let’s take the Bible and compare it with the current scientific understanding, shall we?
According to the Bible, the Earth is 6,000 years old. According to science, it’s about 4.54 billion years old. That’s a bit of a discrepancy. According to the Bible, animals appeared as is. According to science, they did not appear as is, but evolved over time (in fact, it’s part of your rant). According to the Bible, we all started with Adam & Eve and haven’t changed one lick since then. According to my Black, Hispanic, and Caucasian neighbors (I’m Native American, myself), we seem to have changed just a little bit… And according to science, we’re much older than 6,000 years. Heck, even my culture predates 6,000 years. I defy you to go tell the Chinese and the Egyptians the Hebrew culture predates theirs.
Your assertion the Israelites were enslaved by the Egyptians isn’t actually supported by any evidence, nor is their Exodus.
While we’re at it, let’s check on a couple of other things. The Bible says God put a light up in both day and night, but we know the moon generates no light of its own. It reflects the light of the sun, so that’s a scientific fail. The Bible says God destroyed the world in a massive flood, but we know one never happened. That’s a massive fail. The Bible says the sun orbits around the Earth. We know the Earth orbits around the Sun. The Bible says bats are birds, we know they are mammals. It says rabbits chew cud, we know they don’t… Do I really need to go on?
Lisa asks…
Atheists, I know why god exists?
Its lengthy so be prepared to read.
I believe God exists because the Laws of science states they were always there and cannot be change. Evolution without a God states nothing exploded and made everything. This is extremely unscientific because it breaks many scientific laws of nature, including the Laws of Conservation of Energy and Mass.
The Laws of Conservation of Energy and Mass are the two basic laws of science that you will study in an academic science class in high school because all reactions, whether it be simple as turning a light on/off or burning a piece of paper on fire, follows these laws. The theory of evolution breaks these two laws making it 100% impossible to happen without a God because evolution without a God claims that nothing created everything from nothing naturally. This is impossible because mass and energy cannot be made or destroyed; only converted. Since cosmic evolution, the first part of evolution that attempts to explain existence, claims that nothing exploded and created two elements that later evolved into the other elements violates these laws. So it is impossible to happen without a God.
However, these are not the only things that disprove evolution that states man evolved from animals. The lack of evidence for evolution is overwhelming. There are many considerable differences between animals and humans, there are no links that showing animals evolved from one kind to another, and there is no observation or test showing nonliving things, such as Hydrogen or Helium atoms, can produce cellular life. In fact Charles Darwin once stated that if evolution is true there will have to be hundreds of thousands of fossils showing the evolving state of animals turning into different kinds of animals over time.
The Judo-Christian God of the Bible is the One and True God because He is the only God that has with stood the test of time, science, history, and prophecies of the Bible. This can be seen through the Dead Sea Scrolls that were written over 2000 years ago; proving that it with stood the test of time because it matches up word-for-word of the Hebrew Bible today. Verses such as Leviticus 17:14 stating “For it is the life of all flesh; the blood of it is for the life thereof: therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh: for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof: whosoever eateth it shall be cut off.” and Isaiah 40:22 stating “It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:”. These verses in the Bible are proven to be scientifically true thousands of years after they were written! The Israelites being enslaved to the Egyptians 3000 years ago and the Israelites spending 40 years in the desert is historically accurate proving that the Bible stands the test of history. And the test of prophecy is being fulfilled right now by the world leaders discussing and making plans how on they, the leaders of the world, are able to unite the world through a global government and economy. This is written in the Bible in verse of Revelation 13:7 “And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.” and in Revelation 13:16-17 “And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.”.
admin answers:
Your first paragraph is nothing more than a mere straw man.
Your second paragraph shows truly how little you know about science. Try posting that on the Physics section of the website and see how epically you get owned.
Your third paragraph once again demonstrates the gap in your head where the understanding of science you claim to have should be. You neglect to mention the fact that, for one, fossilisation doesn’t always happen, and that we haven’t *found* every fossil. I’m appalled by your inability to accept an already proven scientific principle which we can still see today. Here are two examples of easily observable evolution, without delving into fossil records.
Notice there are almost no more red squirrels in Britain? That’s because red squirrels weren’t suited for our environment, and thus red squirrels slowly began to die off over here, and we’re left with grey squirrels, who are better adapted to live here.
And what about bacteria? When you use antibiotics on bacteria, you kill off all the bacteria that cannot resist the antibiotics. But when, by pure chance, one or two bacteria spring up that are resistant to antibiotics, these ones quickly multiply and cannot be killed by antibiotics. Thus, you are left with bacteria who have evolved to be resistant to antibiotics.
Your fourth paragraph uses unsourced baseless assertions; ipse-dixitisms, like “the Israelites spending 40 years in the desert is historically accurate proving that the Bible stands the test of history”. “world leaders discussing and making plans how on they, the leaders of the world, are able to unite the world through a global government and economy.” This is electioneering, just because politicians use fanciful words to try and win the favour of the public, why does that make the Bible, which uses similar language, valid?
Your argument is weak and pathetic; negligent of scientific principles and facts; failing to source your claims; equivocating and drawing links where there are none and ignoring links where they are present, and based upon appeals to authority. If you honestly think anybody but yourself is convinced by this fallible straw man, you need to get help.
Sharon asks…
Would you read something like this?
This is a very brief and rough draft of the summary of my story. I’m sorry if its a little confusing I haven’t decided on the name of my characters yet. I would love to hear whether this is something that would interest you as a reader, and what I can do to make it more clear. If you have any questions please write them and i’ll do my best to answer them in a timely fashion. Thanks 
A young girl, a demon. Is told that she has to marry someone she barely knows. Infuriated she runs away to the human realm. Blending in at school was hard and she got bullied a lot, finally fed up with it she joins the school gang and slowly rises in ranks till she’s the leader of the gang. After a while she starts to notice one of the members in the group. He wasn’t really outstanding in any way, but still he intrigued her. They soon start to go out. Never really expecting to fall for him, she thinks her heart is safe. But when her father sends his demons to threaten the guys life, she ends up giving him up to save him. A month later she gets the surprise of her life when he shows up in the demon realm, and as a half demon. Throwing herself in his arms she starts to cry. The door suddenly bangs open and her husband (she got married when she got back), strides in his minions in his wake. Seeing his wife in the arms of another man, a battle ensues. The outcome, the love of their life is dead and at the hand of her husband. In passing she had given the rest of her life energy and powers to her love and he battled with her husband. Soon the fight is over and the husband is dead, the guy critically injured crawls to his dead love and waits to die. Waking up he finds that he is not dead and that he is now the ruler of the demon realm. After his coronation he does one last favour for his dead love. He scatters her ashes over the ocean.
admin answers:
I’d read it, me and my best friend loves stories like that. But just so you know, you should definitely make the summary shorter and instead of summarizing the whole story, you should tell bits and pieces, and end it with the reader wondering what happens next and want to read more.
Oh, and don’t listen to Peaches. Everyone has different tastes in books, and you shouldn’t let the people that don’t like the type of stories you write bother you. Just focus on the people that do like it, and prepare yourself for some criticism, it might help you become a better writer. Good luck! Oh, and I really would love to read that story. It sounds interesting and dramatic. I think everyone likes a little drama.
Ruth asks…
Don’t you think the next president should proclaim “by 2015, 90% of US power will come from solar, wind…?
This should be America’s #1 priority. “Free” electricity to all US citizens. A federal initiative to generate the US power needs from wind, solar, ocean currents and other alternative energy sources. By setting the goal, we can easily achieve that goal as a nation. Just as we set the goal to land on the moon… With free electricity, cars can be plugged in, instead of fueled. This initiative saves American’s a significant amount of money, it protects us from relying on foreign oil, it helps planet earth, it provides millions of new jobs. We have plenty of desert for solar panels and we are surrounded by ocean currents and tradewinds that can easily produce all the electricity we need. Now we just need a leader with a little common sense and some guts!
Of course this is not an easy task and there were plenty of people who said:
1) man will never land on the moon
2) a country will never have a national roadway sytem that connects the east and west coasts
3) TV will never catch on
4) the great wall of china can not be built
5) pyramids cant be built
6) man cant fly
and many more examples….
All great accomplishments seem insurmountable at the conception. But if the human mind can pictured it, then it is possible. I don’t know exactly how (no one does), but I am sure that a combination of nuclear, wind, solar, wave, fuel cell and other technologies can make it happen. At this point it is a matter of setting the national goal, allocating resources and not making excuses why it cant be done.
admin answers:
Not remotely practical. Solar and wind power are far, far away from being practical on a large scale. California is the leading state for both sources of energy. Some facts:
“Two thirds of America’s wind power capacity is located in California. The state’s 1817 MW of wind farms, nominally 3.4% of in-state generating capacity, are available only when the wind blows at optimum speeds. Thus they produce only 1.2% of the electricity consumed in the state.” (See reference source below.) Even with this very limited use of wind power, environmentalists are already complaining about how the windmills scar the landscape, kill birds, generate EMFs, etc. Significant expansion of wind power, enough to make a real dent in our demand, would be nearly impossible, especially in that short time frame.
As for solar, another quote from the listed source below is instructive: “All of America’s central station solar electricity is generated in California. At maximum capacity, California’s nine solar stations-with a combined total of 11 square miles of mirrors focused on steam drums that drive steam turbines-can generate 413 MW of electricity, 0.8% of the state’s capacity. Because the sun sets at night and is sometimes attenuated by clouds, these plants produce only 0.3% of California’s electricity. ”
This very limited solar energy production is the product of enormous and expensive subsidies. The real cost of this power, therefore, is many times greater than the cost of fossil-fuel generated electricity. Again, we should do some math here. In order to generate enough electricity for the state of California alone, we would need about 4,000 square miles of solar mirrors/panels, plus specialized turbines and generators. We have neither the room nor the money to make this happen. And imagine the firestorm of protest if we were to create such a monstrocity in the middle of the state. Other states are not so sunny, and would require an even greater proportion of solar panels in order to meet demand for electricity.
The irony is that we have an alternative source of energy that is both clean and safe: nuclear power. However, we have not constructed a new nuclear power plant since the 70s. Fears raised about potential for accidents are way overblown. For example, Chernobyl could never happen here for dozens of reasons, but mostly because: (1) the Soviet design was seriously flawed and no one in the west would ever have considered constructing a similarly designed plant; and (2) the Soviet system produced substandard equipment and materials, so, for instance, they would run out of concrete in the middle of a pour and just pick up where they left off when they got more…horribly unsafe practice. We don’t have these problems in the U.S. Waste is a problem, but certainly not insurmountable. It’s time to consider seriously a return to nuclear power.
Robert asks…
What do you think about DNC chairman Tim Kaine’s statement today re Limbaugh being the Godfather of the GOP?
”
“Today, President Obama and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood unveiled new job-creating infrastructure projects that were made possible by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. These projects are helping put Americans back to work while also investing in repairing our crumbling infrastructure. But, instead of joining Democrats in supporting the President’s economic recovery plan, almost every single Republican in Congress chose to follow Rush Limbaugh by voting against a plan that will create or save 3.5 million jobs. Now, instead of the denouncing Limbaugh’s claim that he is rooting for the President to fail, my counterpart at the Republican National Committee proved who is really leading their party—calling Rush Limbaugh to apologize after courageously criticizing him just this weekend.
“Americans want leaders who will work together to confront the challenges we face. When Congress debates the President’s budget, Republicans should stop following Rush Limbaugh and instead help the President create jobs, fix our schools, reform our health care system, make America energy independent, and lay the foundation for long-term growth in the 21st Century.”
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/washington-whispers/2009/03/03/tim-kaine-michael-steeles-apology-proves-rush-limbaugh-runs-the-gop.html
admin answers:
Tim Kaine is doing his job; and I don’t mean as Governor of Virginia. He’s doing his job as chairman of the DNC, which consists entirely of beating the Republican Party. If he can make Michael Steele look like an ineffectual leader, and Republicans in Congress look like they’re all following Rush Limbaugh’s lead, then Americans will be more likely to elect Democrats instead.
What Chairman Kaine intentionally glosses over is that the vote on the stimulus bill came weeks before Limbaugh’s speech at CPAC, and that it had to do with ideology, not partisanism.
As for Michael Steele, he is the chairman of the Republican Party. He doesn’t have to explain or defend that position to anyone, even Rush Limbaugh. Even at that, though, he would rather be friends with Rush than create the sort of internecine warfare that Chairman Kaine, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, and Rahm Emmanuel are trying to encourage in the GOP.
As an independent who voted for Tim Kaine in 2005, I have to say that he’s doing a great job as governor and is off to a good start as the DNC Chair; but his blatant dishonesty in this situation just to scrounge a few more votes for his side makes me embarrassed to have voted for him.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers