Religion Irreligion - the world's fastest growing 'religion'

[TheHeatleyStand]

so again I'm asking you to define your argument in real indisputable scientific methodology instead of convoluted narrative that doesn't mean anything logical and without any true scientific methodology

 

[Roylion]

your stuff is very erroneous
like the stuff that you brought up have been debunked

Debunked by who?

ok I went evidence and proof of your claims on the big bang theory being real!

Once again. The "Big Bang" summarises the most widely-accepted scientific theory of how the known universe developed into its present state. Note that the Big-Bang theory does not attempt to describe the initial conditions or first cause of the universe. The theory merely addresses the development of the universe from its extremely dense and hot early stages into its present form.

All the available scientific evidence including gravitational waves, the 'Doppler Effect', Cosmic Microwave Background radiation (CMB) and the abundance of the Hydrogen and Helium found in the observable universe, support that model.

There are four primary pieces of evidence for the Big Bang that are so well-established that they are referred to as the "four pillars" of the Big Bang. While other pieces of evidence exist, these four are the most compelling.

Pillar 1: The Universe is expanding
Pillar 2: Cosmic microwave background radiation
Pillar 3: Abundance of light chemical elements
Pillar 4: Galactic morphology and distribution

just as scientists no longer go with gravitational waves as per your example

Don't they? Gravitational-wave astronomy is an emerging branch of observational astronomy which aims to use gravitational waves to collect observational data about objects such as neutron stars and black holes, events such as supernovae and processes including those of the early universe seconds after the Big Bang.

In February 2017, physicists revealed what the gravitational waves produced at the start of the Universe would have looked like. The latest obeservations of gravitational waves were made on 8th and 12th April 2019.

 

[M Malice]

TheHeatleyStand

Do you accept the scientific theory of evolution via natural selection particularly as it applies to Homo Sapiens as correct?

 

[LFTWNG11]

but when it isn't based on logic or evidence they shouldn't be laughing at my opinion or pretending to be more intelligent!

So essentially, unless you have evidence, don't pretend to be more intelligent but...

and if the universe and life / creation is a mystery to science.. a super ego which created all things is more logical because it's not supposed to have evidence

God is more logical because it has no evidence.

I suppose it's hard to lose an argument when you have circular logic going around in your own head.

 

[M Malice]

So essentially, unless you have evidence, don't pretend to be more intelligent but...



God is more logical because it has no evidence.

I suppose it's hard to lose an argument when you have circular logic going around in your own head.

I was trying to point this out to TheHeatleyStand but not as eloquently and concisely as you. Win win for THS.

 

[Roylion]

so again I'm asking you to define your argument in real indisputable scientific methodology instead of convoluted narrative that doesn't mean anything logical and without any true scientific methodology

Ironic. Perhaps you should follow your own request.

 

[Boston tiger]

The Biblcial narrative I assume you are referring to.

I was commenting on the claim that the Big Bang Theory "can be discounted". It clearly can't. I also stated that the Big Bang Theory was more plausible and creditable as an actual explanation and description of the processes of the development of the universe / earth / life than a creation "story" written down by an ancient cultural group, roughly between 700 - 200 BC.



Yes. And?

Development v creation . Just stop. They are not in the same conversation.

 

[Boston tiger]

Ironic. Perhaps you should follow your own request.

Oh dear

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

Ironic. Perhaps you should follow your own request.

I'm not arguing science
you are!

 

[Roylion]

Development v creation . Just stop. They are not in the same conversation.

In some respects you are correct. One posits "God" the other doesn't.

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

Oh dear

yeah the people who are all about science can't argue with reason

maybe humans haven't mutated enough and go through enough random changes to get there

maybe we need to mutate and randomly go through anther million years of changes?

all I'm saying is if everything has a beginning and that the big bang had a beginning it couldn't have just randomly appeared out of thin air because nothing randomly appears out of nothingness

that's one of the laws of science

and yet we have people that believe that something did pop up out of thin air

it is called a universe and only the universe can create this effect without cause!

nothing else but a whole universe

and since billions of years ago nothing else had achieved this great act

so I'm wondering why would only one thing go bang out of thin air and nothing else?

love for a Carlton flag to appear out of thin air

just go bang and appear!

no cause... just effect

you do realise that buy debating this you're agreeing with the Bible

"and then there was light!"

at least there there's a reason why the universe began

God said so!

for God is not in bondage to time as space and he's omnipresent and a super ego

you don't have to agree if you have a better theory I wanna hear it!

but use science!
and methodology

religion is my argument and you can't have it also!

you drew your line in the sand earlier.. when you laughed

but you don't have an scientific based argument

you're leaning towards religion with your arguments more and more

you're not allowed to do that!

you have to stick to your side

 

[Roylion]

and yet we have people that believe that something did pop up out of thin air

The Big Bang theory merely addresses the development of the universe from its extremely dense and hot early stages into its present form. And there's plenty of observational scientific evidence that supports this model as I have already described.

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

Development v creation . Just stop. They are not in the same conversation.

mate! you can state whatever you want but you don't have scientific evidence!

nobody is telling you you can't state stuff but I'm just politely trying to tell you that your case isn't scientifically sound so it's not steeped in science
it's hypothesized narrative

I'm not going to continue this with you because you seem rattled!

you're not capable of expanding your argument rationally and you're not explaining the origin of the big bang scientifically with scientific methodology

look just do what I do

say

"I'm not going to debate you on God because I don't believe in him and I don't know anything for I am a human that has randomly mutated billions and billions of times and I'm going to randomly change billions and billions of more times.. because if the universe is changing randomly but in a perfection .. I'm changing with it and I'm perfect for where the universe is right now but I'll be randomly changing into another creature with it.. and one day in billions of years I might be in a world and be the kind of creature who can answer that question!"


you actually believe it's easier to debate science than God but it's simply not!

it's a narrative that people believe in without thinking

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

The Big Bang theory merely addresses the development of the universe from its extremely dense and hot early stages into its present form. And there's plenty of observational scientific evidence that supports this model as I have already described.

ok so something or someone created the big bang and allowed it to develop

ok you've caught up

but what created the big bang?

let there be light is already taken by religion

your turn

 

[Boston tiger]

In some respects you are correct. One posits "God" the other doesn't.

And that is why in the Bible my friends all you will find is a small 2 minute creation story and not a 20,000 page scientific development story.
God is the creator and lets all move on unless anyone has got any better idea on how existence can into existence. I want pre Big Bang stuff not yeah things change and things are moving blah blah.

 

[Mr Blicavs]

so again I'm asking you to define your argument in real indisputable scientific methodology instead of convoluted narrative that doesn't mean anything logical and without any true scientific methodology

Woulkd have been easier to just say "Come at me with facts"
What a pretentious, convoluted, over use of adjectives

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

do you see where I'm going with this and where you're not?

I'm not necessarily arguing that there wasn't a big bang development

I'm arguing that the big bang needed help

and I'm saying that the way things are structured AND have developed so you and I are sitting here discussing this is perfection
and that to set the big bang off and give us perfection including all the metaphysical stuff like awareness
and the climate
and emotions
and sliders
and eyelids
and hair
and teeth
and food
and oxygen
and water
and the sun for heat
gas for energy
Fire for heating and cooking
materials for shelter
intelligence to create ( much like God created and things don't pop up out on us to enjoy with a big bang)
. and everything else didn't just happen with a big bang and only a big bang that happened out of nowhere and nothing else happened out of nothingness

can you understand that?

religion isn't stupid unless you really want it to be stupid and you convince yourself it's stupid because somebody convinced you!

and the problem is there's no critical thinking

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

And that is why in the Bible my friends all you will find is a small 2 minute creation story and not a 20,000 page scientific development story.
God is the creator and lets all move on unless anyone has got any better idea on how existence can into existence. I want pre Big Bang stuff not yeah things change and things are moving blah blah.

yeah it's the reader's digest short version so we are not reading it for a few billion years while development was going on

now you can choose to believe any religion you wish

or you might wish to not

but don't put down religious people as idiots for having their opinion.. and their religion

 

[Roylion]

ok so something or someone created the big bang and allowed it to develop

ok you've caught up

but what created the big bang?

let there be light is already taken by religion

your turn

Who knows what caused the Big Bang? Science doesn't have an answer for that. And I've never claimed that it does.

If you want to think that some immortal, supernatural being or deity that is the perfect, omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient originator/creator and ruler of the universe, you go for it. I personally see no real reason to believe in that as the 'answer', but if you take some comfort in believing that purely by faith then good for you.

My point has always been that the Big Bang Theory does NOT attempt to describe the initial conditions or first cause of the universe. The theory merely addresses the development of the universe from its extremely dense and hot early stages into its present form.

I've said this three times now. My point also was addressing your original comment of that the Big Bang "can be discounted" as a theory. I diagree with this and I've explained quite clearly why I disagree with this.

 

[Roylion]

I'm not necessarily arguing that there wasn't a big bang development

So you acknowledge that there is supportive scientific empirical evidence for the Big Bang Theory. There we go. It wasn't that hard was it.

Now onto evolution.

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

what do your mean who cares what caused the big bang?

that's laughable

and it's a very desperate answer from a person who can't understand that the cause and effect are everythimg in all this

and for you to dismiss one thing and have nothing is pitiful

you even just ran down science

angry with science for not providing answers

all you were interested in was a no real argument narrative that is meaningless to the discussion we're having..

with that I bid you bye!

I was hoping for more from someone who could help provide a better answer!

but alas your argument was quite sad!

no substance and no logic
it was big on meaningless narrative that was full of red herrings and lots of voodoo science

no cause and effect

and no attention to creation and what began everything

you really need to take a good hard look at what you believe is fact!

because by the sounds of things you don't have a critical mind

and I bet that flows to everything you believe

but if it makes you feel better to consider me stupid.. by all means you can

I can't be offended if you believe that!

 

[M Malice]

So you acknowledge that there is supportive scientific empirical evidence for the Big Bang Theory. There we go. It wasn't that hard was it.

Now onto evolution.

I'd like to see that discussion.

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

So you acknowledge that there is supportive scientific empirical evidence for the Big Bang Theory. There we go. It wasn't that hard was it.

Now onto evolution.

look mate

before we move to evolution

and I'm all over the narrative even more than the creation

you need to understand context

what came before development?

once you answer that satisfactorily.. I'll give you a very nice debate on mankind AND NOT Darwin's THEORY on evolution

you have not thought about this much have you?

lol

one of the worst things about modern educated man is the lack of intellect and critical thought

intellect is abstract thinking not memory and repeat

memory and repeat might be false too!

anyway you'll need to give me the origin of the universe and we can move on

God created development also...


but let's hear your theory on what created the big bang!

we shall skip the evidence and proof

but we need to continue in some kind of context as we might have to revisit origin with humanity
and your theory of evolution

lol

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

I'd like to see that discussion.

me too!

though I am sure I have his measure on this one too

but one step at a time... be patient grasshopper!

narratives mean shit if they're not backed up by evidence... ever wondered why it's still a theory?

you're about to find out!

as soon as he gives us his answer on what created the big bang

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

this is why they don't teach philosophy any more

because it smashes mindless narratives