solid_core
Well-Known Member
- Oct 13, 2019
- 2,695
- 1,579
- Country
- Austria
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
But you still need the probability wave to collapse. And the collapse needs a cause.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
But you still need the probability wave to collapse. And the collapse needs a cause.Everything might not need a cause though. In fact, just reading up on quantum mechanics and examples of things that violate classical causality is fascinating.
Which is why it is an error to treat the Bible as "inerrant" when it comes to the sciences. People not knowing what they are not expected to know does not refute the Bible, unless one tries to claim that everything in the Bible is correct. Biblical inerrancy is a quick road to atheism if one reasons rationally.Bible actually does not teach anything about it. Human writers just non-systematically used what they liked, for the center of thinking and emotions - heart, reins, kidneys. They simply did not know.
Bible actually teaches only theological truths. That God is one, that God is Creator of everything, that we sin etc.
Oh boy. In that video he lied so badly about Szostak that he extended a rather false apology to him. Tour got caught lying again and again in that video. Not the best source to use. I can post a video by another chemist that explains the obvious falsehoods that Tour made. A lay person could have made those claims without lying since they do not know better. Tour could not make the same claim. He had to know better. He knew that he lied.I'm not familiar with his work,,,but this is the same type of work that James Tour is familiar with. I believe he's a bio-chemical scientist.
So far, no life has been produced in a lab.
There are only 4 chemicals that are needed to make life, and yet it cannot be done.
I'll post a video of James Tour that I like:
It starts at about 6 min. the beginning is his personal life....
Except that the cosmos has NOT always been here.This is not true on a quantum level. On a quantum level events are statistical and not "cause and effect". Cause and effect is a result of large numbers. There is no "Law of cause and effect" in the sciences. It is still a very useful concept almost all of the time, but it is not written in stone the way that many people think that it is.
And it is a special pleading fallacy to rely on a God for a first cause. One could just as easily claim that the cosmos has always been here in one form or another. If one can claim that their deity needs no cause then by the same logic one can claim that the cosmos needs no cause either.
Why?But you still need the probability wave to collapse. And the collapse needs a cause.
Right.Everything might not need a cause though. In fact, just reading up on quantum mechanics and examples of things that violate classical causality is fascinating.
Bible actually does not teach anything about it. Human writers just non-systematically used what they liked, for the center of thinking and emotions - heart, reins, kidneys. They simply did not know.
Bible actually teaches only theological truths. That God is one, that God is Creator of everything, that we sin etc.
Please post it.Oh boy. In that video he lied so badly about Szostak that he extended a rather false apology to him. Tour got caught lying again and again in that video. Not the best source to use. I can post a video by another chemist that explains the obvious falsehoods that Tour made. A lay person could have made those claims without lying since they do not know better. Tour could not make the same claim. He had to know better. He knew that he lied.
Except that the cosmos has NOT always been here.
Pre 1960 that was believed and so it was easier to believe that it just existed. After the 60's when it became proven that the universe had a beginning, the problem did begin for those scientists that are not willing to accept that there might be a creator.
I think it's rather lazy on both sides to believe that the other side cannot be right.
Lazy to believe that God created everything...
and lazy to believe that the universe just happened somehow.
Maybe we should just wait and see what turns out?
We may not know within our life time...I think it's a long time coming.
So what if he asked the audience. Do you think that there were any there?Please post it.
Sometimes he asks if there are chemists in the audience and looks for affirmation.
The Schrödinger's cat - the cat is both dead and alive until you look - at that moment the Universe will present one single result.Why?
Sure. There could be a multiverse...No, the Big Bang Theory only says that the universe as we know it had a beginning. There could be a larger universe. There may have been a "before the Big Bang". And if not even if the Big Bang was the start of our universe since time started then the idea of a "before" may be nonsensical. No one has shown any need of a deity or any logical reason to believe in one. And even if you come up with a deity then the same objections occur against him.
I went through various churches and never read a creed saying "we belive that our Bible is scientifically inerrant". But its maybe because I live in Europe.Which is why it is an error to treat the Bible as "inerrant" when it comes to the sciences. People not knowing what they are not expected to know does not refute the Bible, unless one tries to claim that everything in the Bible is correct. Biblical inerrancy is a quick road to atheism if one reasons rationally.
Please post it.
Sometimes he asks if there are chemists in the audience and looks for affirmation.
Yes, I'm not enamoured of the KJV.
But, in this case, every version uses the word SNAKE.
Assuming it BECAME a snake...it was still an animal before it tempted Eve. I do not believe it was another person or an angel. There was no other human type being around at that time....
I don't think it's very important to know what the snake was....just that Eve was tempted and Adam broke his covenant with God and caused the fall of humankind with his disobedience.
And, I do agree about the root words,,,but only in very few cases. I believe we can take the bible in its present translation and it tells us all we need to know about God and about salvation.
Well, its obvious they did not know much about the universe, anatomy or biology.they were men inspired by the Holy Spirit of God ... and some actually experiencing the presence of God
You do not know what they knew. Maybe they knew more than what you think they knew. Likely!
You do not seem to understand, having a deity does not answer any more questions. It only raises new ones. It has no explanatory powers.Sure. There could be a multiverse...
but we still have the same problem. It does not solve the question.
Right now science cannot get BEFORE the BB.
If I'm not mistaken (and I might be) I do believe science has confirmed that time did not exist before the BB and this is why they cannot get to that split nano second just before the explosion...which should have imploded, BTW, but it didn't. Another good question to answer...why did it not implode?
Having a deity create everything is just as mysterious as having everything come from nothing.
Sadly it is mostly an American problem. So much so that leaders that believe that from other countries flock to the U.S.. Ken Ham and Ray Comfort for example. Many U.S. Christians have a hard time believing that most Christians accept the theory of evolution.I went through various churches and never read a creed saying "we belive that our Bible is scientifically inerrant". But its maybe because I live in Europe.
Old question.
If everything MUST have a cause....
then the FIRST CAUSE CANNOT have a cause.
Reminds me of what I used to ask myself:
What's easier to believe?
That God made everything
or
That everything came from nothing.
I decided on the first.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?