Liverpool FC Forum

[kalos]

LFC2007- and your point is?

Laughing smileys without answers =ignorance at worst , papering overr the cracks at best.

Life from  non-living  - give me a step by step guide with evidence.

[Big Niall]

Scientists admit they don't know how that first living single cell went from nothing to something, likewise they don't know how the universe went from nothing to something.

They have good evidence though on the movement from that first cell on to more complex organisms, looking at DNA structures of animals (like us) that look very different from other animals, yet, it is just a few tweaks of DNA to go from one to the other.

Stem cells can go from one creature and be put into another, which suggests that we all came from the same structure.

I admit I'm no scientist but it makes a lot more sense than the bible, or something with no evidence (god)

[dawson99]

Scientists admit they don't know how that first living single cell went from nothing to something, likewise they don't know how the universe went from nothing to something.

They have good evidence though on the movement from that first cell on to more complex organisms, looking at DNA structures of animals (like us) that look very different from other animals, yet, it is just a few tweaks of DNA to go from one to the other.

Stem cells can go from one creature and be put into another, which suggests that we all came from the same structure.

I admit I'm no scientist but it makes a lot more sense than the bible, or something with no evidence (god)

how do you know i exist? You've never seen me, or how do you know villages in Africa you have never been to don't exist?

Or Angelina Jolie, you never saw her in the flesh?

[SupitsJonF]

All those not in agreement please explain how the elements that make up the Universe got here.

Then explain and demonstrate conclusively how these non living elements became living.

After reading the last few pages, besides the bit about "one day" actually could be millions of years, an argument I find interesting, most of this is a weak argument going around and around in a circle.

Kalos says the quoted text, and believes that a creator, God, would had to of done this, and so he has faith in him.  Completely acceptable.  What i find unacceptable, is the argument, "Well, theres no explanation that it could of been something else, so it has to be God."  In your case, with your beliefs, thats fine.  But in trying to use that as an argument, not true at all, there will always be so much the human race will never understand.  A point should be proved with evidence, not LACK of evidence. 

Then we have Joeterp and AndyG, who believe it is all down to science and there is no God, also completely acceptable.  But once again, there is no concrete evidence that god does not exist, so just saying that there is a lack of evidence in gods existence to prove he doesnt exist, is also a silly argument.  You can throw science behind that too, but all the way down the road we will never know what caused that, whether it be a creator or something out.

Summary, there is and hopefully never will be concrete evidence of gods existence/non existence.  Or else faith wouldn't exist, which I see as a beautiful thing.  I myself am not religious, but I respect both views and if someone truly believes in God I encourage it.  Things i can't stand are people who are too narrow minded and unwilling to see the other viewpoint (not saying you 3 are).

[account deleted by request]

Its very difficult to prove something doesn't exist. I have an invisible man who lives at the bottom of my garden. He doesn't move talk or do anything really,and you can pass your hand right through him without feeling anything, but the bugger is watching me all the time. The only reason I know he is there is that he once threw some stone tablets at me......I picked them up and threw them right back but I wasn't sure where he was so I probably missed.

[Benny The Noon]

Now that made me chuckle

[JoeTerp]

Its very difficult to prove something doesn't exist. I have an invisible man who lives at the bottom of my garden. He doesn't move talk or do anything really,and you can pass your hand right through him without feeling anything, but the bugger is watching me all the time. The only reason I know he is there is that he once threw some stone tablets at me......I picked them up and threw them right back but I wasn't sure where he was so I probably missed.

well and fine if people want to say they believe in an invisible man, it becomes something different when that invsible man tells you to its ok to kill people that don't believe in him, or its ok to treat women differently then men, or that you were born into sin, or that that invisible man could punish you for all eternity after you die, and that same invisible man can hear your thoughts.  That is the problem.

I would certainly agree that its impossible to prove that God doesn't exist IF you try and wiggle around and say that everything that we don't know about the world is God. However, that doesn't make it a 50/50 proposition. Its not even comparable to thinking that Liverpool could win the league this year, its not even comparable to Newkit FC winning the FA Cup in 2010, its so far down the line that the odds of God existing are so unimaginably small, you couldn't even comprehend how small it is (a lot like how religious folk say that you can't comprehend the complexity of God     )

[SupitsJonF]

becomes something different when that invsible man tells you to its ok to kill people that don't believe in him, or its ok to treat women differently then men, or that you were born into sin, or that that invisible man could punish you for all eternity after you die, and that same invisible man can hear your thoughts.  That is the problem.

Not much too add, I guess just +1

[metalhead]

well and fine if people want to say they believe in an invisible man, it becomes something different when that invsible man tells you to its ok to kill people that don't believe in him, or its ok to treat women differently then men, or that you were born into sin, or that that invisible man could punish you for all eternity after you die, and that same invisible man can hear your thoughts.  That is the problem.

I would certainly agree that its impossible to prove that God doesn't exist IF you try and wiggle around and say that everything that we don't know about the world is God. However, that doesn't make it a 50/50 proposition. Its not even comparable to thinking that Liverpool could win the league this year, its not even comparable to Newkit FC winning the FA Cup in 2010, its so far down the line that the odds of God existing are so unimaginably small, you couldn't even comprehend how small it is (a lot like how religious folk say that you can't comprehend the complexity of God     )

BS, the invisible man doesn't tell you its ok to kill people, or harm women or treat them differently. Its not a fact, its an interpretation, God doesn't tell you to do these things, we do it on our free will, we do it because we interpret something and go and act on it. Its like this telephone game you play when your a kid with a couple of your friends, you say something and in the end of the line the last kid doesn't say the same sentence that you said, its the same thing.

In my opinion, I believe in God because I chose to, not because I was raised up to believe in him, its because I believe that God himself created the physics and the mechanics on evolution and the universe, that what we see is just the machine working. Some things in the universe you cannot explain scientifically, you cannot prove it factually, ok they create theories, but theories can be myths or wrong, its just a prediction of how things are. Thats why alot of people, believe in some supernatural being, an energy that made the orbits of the planets perfect.

[kalos]

BigNiall - "" it is just a few tweaks of DNA to go from one to the other""

mate therein lies one of the problems that I have with evolutionists you see  there is no such thing as  a "tweak of DNA".

To Darwin the shape of the beaks of the finches in the Galapagos Islands was a small change (and by the way I'm not saying that variation in a species is not possible it manifestly is but you dont see birds changing in to reptiles in a smooth succession with thousands of intermediaries)

In actual fact the smallest change in physical appearance involves tens if not hundreds of thousands of rearrangements at the molecular level of the DNA specifically in whats known as the base pairs.

The problem for evolutionists is that 99.9% of the possible rearrangement  code for nothing and the "probability" of "tweaks " of DNA throwing up anything useful are literally 1 in millions.

And we are expected to believe that its these "small tweaks " over an over again  which are in fact monumental changes "just happened".

I am absolutely convinced that if Darwin had known what we know about the DNA's complexity he would have ripped up his own book and sharpish.

[JoeTerp]

I suggest you publish your findings, you'll probably become world famous for debunking the theory of evolution by natural selection.

[LFC2007]

LFC2007- and your point is?

Laughing smileys without answers =ignorance at worst , papering overr the cracks at best.

Life from  non-living  - give me a step by step guide with evidence.

Well, currently we do not know how life originated, although there is work being done that attempts to explain how life might have developed from non-living matter. No doubt having studied DNA/RNA yourself, and having been convinced that only God could be responsible for life, you must be absolutely certain that they will have nothing to show for their efforts further down the line.

Suffice to say, even if it were possible to synthesise a self-sustaining organism, we are never likely to know how life on earth came into existence since it would only ever show that life can be synthesised under laboratory conditions. There are simply too many possibilities to be able to accurately show how it would have occurred in a prebiotic environment.

But even that is prone to creationism-isms, for even if life can be synthesised, either the science would be superceded by God (it would be claimed to be flawed), or a re-defining of 'living organism' would be sought.

Let me be clear as well, I'm not religious but I'm no militant atheist either. In fact, I find some militant atheists almost as irritating as some creationists. There's a reluctance on their part to admit that sometimes we simply cannot know, because they think science holds all the answers. Plus they try and spoil the fun for religious moderates by attacking religion as a whole, which I find pretty distasteful to say the least.

[Keris]

What is the point of existence should you not have prove yourself worthy of heaven or hell?or be accountable for your actions/deeds/wrongdoings?

You do good in life and than you die?
You kill someone else and than you die?
That's it? So what is the point of time or space, the wars we fought, the discoveries we made, the value we hold, the child we bourne?

How is the notion of 'just living and then dying' acceptable but not the notion of ' the existence of a higher being'?

[Kharhaz]

In my opinion, I believe in God because I chose to, not because I was raised up to believe in him, its because I believe that God himself created the physics and the mechanics on evolution and the universe, that what we see is just the machine working.

Thats fine, a belief shared by many but my belief is, I just accept everything as it just "is". For me to believe in a god would have to open my mind up to all other things. For example, Medusa. Everyone knows who medusa is, what she is and whether she was good or evil but she is dismissed as a myth. Why? Everyone knows about Medusa, but dont accept she was real. The same with other creatures, Centaurs, Minotaurs, again everyone knows what they are but dismiss them as myth. And in this category is where god falls. There is no proof of god existing. Man is here for whatever reason, and its probably a complicated one, but to dismiss those reasons for a simpler "god made man in his own image" simplification is to brush a lifelong question under the carpet.

Of the religious people, how many would actually listen to the reasons and question the reasoning as to why god doesnt exist? I would say a good percentage tend to plug their ears yelling "la la la". A belief is a relief of life for people who want simplified answers to life. Many people when they have suffered a grievance tend to look towards religion. Not to convert but to try to find some consolation, to give hope.

And thats all religion is. Its a blanket to cover up the questions of life, to simplify things, to give hope. Every question has an answer and we all have them, but each of us has a question we dont want the answer to. And thats where religion helps. It diverts you to the answer you want to hear.

[SouthCoastShankly]

All those not in agreement please explain how the elements that make up the Universe got here.

Then explain and demonstrate conclusively how these non living elements became living.

After reading the last few pages, besides the bit about "one day" actually could be millions of years, an argument I find interesting, most of this is a weak argument going around and around in a circle.

Additionally it is helpful to say that the chronological appearance of living creatures according to the account in Genesis matches the fossil record almost exactly.

Which does provides ammunition for both sides of the arguement. Regardless of how you take the account of Genesis the fossil record backs up the account of Genesis in terms of the order of  appearance of life.

There are clearly three lines of thought -

1. Creation
2. Evolution
3. God driven Evolution, I.e. the creator of the mechanics of the universe

I side with option 3.