Nicely put midnight star
Arikay, the existence of antimatter could be evidence for what you are saying. Perhaps the net sum of everything is zero and the big bang just expressed zero in a peculiar fashion.
Theories like the Big Bang can be attacked because it doesn't go far enough back and then the same argument can be used for a Divine Entity .
But no, some people are too afraid to think of that. Like a lightening bolt will come down and attack them or something. Okay, bad stereotype, but you get it.
Too bad God can't just help us out here. Look at this! Each individual person has their own beliefs based on religious texts written by mortal beings of a dead society then translated by yet another dead society into what we have now: A book that has been manipulated by man in language's that are not infinite or stable. Basic sociology. Truly, only a few people long dead or God know what the ultimate meanings behind every word in the Bible is.
Heck, how did people manage to create a dozen religions out of one single book? We're seeing the confusion and interpretational mistakes multiply and nothing less. So much denial, feedback loops, and futility...
i've always wondered what atheists thought about the orgin of life. the origin of everything. since various harvard, ivy league, big name professors and scientists have said that all evidence points toward a supreme being yet they choose not to believe there is a god because the notion seems 'absurd' 'preposterous', etc. they just refuse to believe it.
hm.
So what do the atheists think is the origin of life? because evolution couldn't have started from nothing.
You should talk to Lucaspa on this one. He's a devote Christian and ardant defender of both biological evolution and scientific abiogenesis. (He's also knowledgable about cosmology.) He runs circles around everyone I've seen and does it with real, tangible evidence. Very refreshing. You'll his posts all over the Evolution threads.
Also, I suggest avoiding the use of such logical falacies as "since various harvard, ivy league, big name professors and scientists have said that all evidence points toward..." as this says nothing. Such a statement could support virtually any assumption and is a blatent appeal to authority without any factual basis. WHO are you talking about? What is their expertise? WHY should I look to these phantom people as authoritative other than you saying so? WHAT percentage of their field do they represent? WHAT SPECIFICALLY do they hold to be true and why? You get the idea.
I've a question. Are there any athiestic theories which actually account for the creation of basic materials? From what I've had the occasion to read about (particualrly the big bang), it seems that they all "begin" with some existing material which reacts to combines in some obscure way. However, they seem to ignore that fact that these materials had to have an origin and an agent to produce the motion which caused the reaction. In this respect, it seems the deist position is the only logical one because science seems to demand some intelligent initiator.
There are several theories for how the Universe came into existence, some of which have more than just mathmatical support, none of which "demands" some intelligent initiator. The Big Bang theory still holds as the best, but it certainly doesn't explain everything perfectly. If you are really interested in a primer, check out the NASA site:
Those NASA folks just happen to be pretty good scientists, as you may be aware. And, again, you might want to avoid these falacial premises, such as "science seems to demand some intelligent initiator" when nothing could be further from the truth. Science is agnostic on the God/Gods issue, and is thankfully not content to just say "I don't know how 'X' happened, therefore a god or gods must have done it." If that were real scientific and rational thinking, we'd still be living in caves.
Regarding the origin of life, in addition to professor frink's post, here is a link to wikipedia about the scientific theory, called abiogenesis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis
i've always wondered what atheists thought about the orgin of life. the origin of everything. since various harvard, ivy league, big name professors and scientists have said that all evidence points toward a supreme being yet they choose not to believe there is a god because the notion seems 'absurd' 'preposterous', etc. they just refuse to believe it.
hm.
So what do the atheists think is the origin of life? because evolution couldn't have started from nothing.
There is no way of knowing.
__________________
Who am I? A misanthropic disillusioned angryatheist who has grown tired of watching the American Experiment torn to pieces by feral, fearful animals masquerading as human beings. Take it for what it's worth.
I didnt realise that i was digging up this thread from 
Linear Mode
