EVE Search - Proof that God does exsist!!!

All Channels

Out of Pod Experience

Proof that God does exsist!!!

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Franklin Richards	Posted - 2008.01.19 08:04:00 - [1] For all you non-believers out there, here is undeniable proof that God exsists.
Ms Tolarri Tolarri Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.01.19 08:07:00 - [2] Do people get paid to spam links to that ****ty site?
Dark Shikari Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2008.01.19 08:08:00 - [3] Edited by: Dark Shikari on 19/01/2008 08:09:17 O RLY? There seems to be definitive proof that God exists. You must believe. (PROTIP: Don't click the OP's link.) Also, this is now a Haruhi thread.
lofty29 Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.01.19 08:08:00 - [4] Edited by: lofty29 on 19/01/2008 08:08:43 Whoops ^^ me Edit - Originally by: Dark Shikari Edited by: Dark Shikari on 19/01/2008 08:08:15 O RLY? There seems to be definitive proof that God exists. You must believe. (PROTIP: Don't click the OP's link.) You unbelievable****got 族---族 Latest Video : FAT- Camp
Kayamas	Posted - 2008.01.19 08:59:00 - [5] Edited by: Kayamas on 19/01/2008 08:59:30 If you really are curious about theological questions like the existence of God then you should definitely watch this interview.
Dark Shikari Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2008.01.19 09:00:00 - [6] Originally by: Kayamas If you really are curious about theological questions like the existence of God then you should definitely watch this interview. Better video.
Balthasar Moreq	Posted - 2008.01.19 09:08:00 - [7] Another interesting read Jesusneverexisted.com
Nadjar Vendetta Underground	Posted - 2008.01.19 09:39:00 - [8] Behold! The atheists nightmare _____________ No sig here, move along.
wierchas noobhunter Cosmic Fusion When Fat Kids Attack	Posted - 2008.01.19 11:06:00 - [9] lets see from bible point of view god created human from his image ( religions says : visual and psychical) then he placed them in eden in center of there he placed uber tree of doom with magic apples () before humans he tho created angles ( tho as his image only with wings and other angel stuff) first his creation was his son JC second was an angle of light whos latter became satan so fisrt people ate magic apple and in process then gained free will and now lets look in history - wars, genocides other religions that claim to be right ones and to show that to all world to that with ak-47 if human is gods with free will then god screwed somewhere badly ( well but he is perfect ) or there is no god
Amarria Black Clan Anthraxx	Posted - 2008.01.19 11:47:00 - [10] Originally by: wierchas noobhunter lets see from bible point of view god created human from his image ( religions says : visual and psychical) then he placed them in eden in center of there he placed uber tree of doom with magic apples () before humans he tho created angles ( tho as his image only with wings and other angel stuff) first his creation was his son JC second was an angle of light whos latter became satan so fisrt people ate magic... C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!!! Originally by: Frug Your reputation has been entirely redeemed in my eyes. I now want your babies.
Joseph 9 Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2008.01.19 12:00:00 - [11] Originally by: Dark Shikari Originally by: Kayamas If you really are curious about theological questions like the existence of God then you should definitely watch this interview. Better video. No NO NO NO NO. WRONG! Why do people keep insisting on posting this crap. The original is a perfectly nice piece of Finnish folk music and people seem to insist on sticking stupid anime characters over it singing in irritating squealy high pitched voices. STOP IT STOP IT NOW.
Gyfrex	Posted - 2008.01.19 12:33:00 - [12] Originally by: Dark Shikari Originally by: Kayamas If you really are curious about theological questions like the existence of God then you should definitely watch this interview. Better video. Not as good as the spinny one withe person from bleach but still fairly amusing, also to despite this being a haruhi thread now no one has really commented...why not?! ---
Orion Eridanus Dark Nova Crisis	Posted - 2008.01.19 13:27:00 - [13] Originally by: Dark Shikari Originally by: Kayamas If you really are curious about theological questions like the existence of God then you should definitely watch this interview. Better video. The fallout version is better Originally by: Paulo Damarr That is a most Excellent Drake fitting, you are lucky to have survived.
Shinnen Caldari Northern Intelligence The Reckoning.	Posted - 2008.01.19 15:10:00 - [14] There is so much [citation needed] in this thread -- Banned since 2005, back by popular demand! They said it wouldn't happen!!
Dark Shikari Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2008.01.19 16:16:00 - [15] Edited by: Dark Shikari on 19/01/2008 16:15:45 Originally by: Joseph 9 Originally by: Dark Shikari Originally by: Kayamas If you really are curious about theological questions like the existence of God then you should definitely watch this interview. Better video. No NO NO NO NO. WRONG! Why do people keep insisting on posting this crap. The original is a perfectly nice piece of Finnish folk music and people seem to insist on sticking stupid anime characters over it singing in irritating squealy high pitched voices. STOP IT STOP IT NOW. The videos with Miku are a meme in and of themselves, and its not an anime character; its a computer program that makes a computerized singing voice. Its called Vocaloid, you can find copies around.
Slave 775 Ministry of Punishment Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.19 16:34:00 - [16] Originally by: Dark Shikari Originally by: Kayamas If you really are curious about theological questions like the existence of God then you should definitely watch this interview. Better video. Hey i like this one !! Its just the right background sound to read the COAD forum part.
JiuTouNiao	Posted - 2008.01.19 16:48:00 - [17] This topic makes me wonder... Should it be closed as spam or as religious discussion? Also: Is anybody else having trouble clicking user posted links on the forums? I'm tempted to blame IE, wish I could install a real browser.
Rawr Cristina Caldari Cult of Rawr	Posted - 2008.01.19 16:48:00 - [18] Originally by: wierchas noobhunter before humans he tho created angles where would we be without the beloved right-angle? WTS Moros
TrustThePilot The White Star Consortium Tenth Legion	Posted - 2008.01.19 17:28:00 - [19] Originally by: Nadjar Behold! The atheists nightmare If I didn't know better I'd think he was joking. What a load. _ To err is human, to forgive is against corporation policy.
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2008.01.19 18:38:00 - [20] So we can talk theology but not politics on this forum? Madness I say
Micheal Dietrich Caldari The Delta Source Dread Sovereign	Posted - 2008.01.19 18:44:00 - [21] Originally by: Marcus TheMartin So we can talk theology but not politics on this forum? Madness I say Actually we can't but we try to get away with both every now n then. You didn't hear that from me though, PRANK CALL PRANK CALL.
Dark Shikari Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2008.01.19 18:52:00 - [22] Originally by: Marcus TheMartin So we can talk theology but not politics on this forum? Madness I say Its fine as long as you don't count Haruhiism as theology.
TrustThePilot The White Star Consortium Tenth Legion	Posted - 2008.01.19 19:31:00 - [23] Not to derail this wondrous thread of threads, but wtf is this Haruhi thing that Dark manages to randomly insert into every-single-thread? It's been a while since I was 'down with the kids'. Ah, to be young again. And also a robot. _ To err is human, to forgive is against corporation policy.
Dark Shikari Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2008.01.19 19:44:00 - [24] Edited by: Dark Shikari on 19/01/2008 19:47:54 Originally by: TrustThePilot Not to derail this wondrous thread of threads, but wtf is this Haruhi thing that Dark manages to randomly insert into every-single-thread? It's been a while since I was 'down with the kids'. Simple summary: Haruhi is the titular character of a series of 9 Japanese novels (which has now become a franchise, with an associated anime, games, etc). The gimmick of the series is, though Haruhi herself doesn't realize it, she is God, or at least has God-like powers that are activated by her subconscious mind. It is the job of the other characters (who do know about her powers) to try to keep her happy, or at least busy; if she gets bored, she might decide to change the cosmos, or create a whole new one altogether, destroying the old. Basically, its a science fiction/mystery series with lots of time travel, in a high school setting. Though the novels were already popular before the anime came out, the TV show propelled it to near-instant popularity. There's something about the concept of a crazy, selfish, paranormal-obsessed Haruhi having the powers of a God that just strikes a chord with people. Plus its hilarious watching Haruhi desperately try to find aliens, time travelers, and psychics when she's actually surrounded by them, yet has no idea they are there. And its a great way to totally trash any thread that attempts to discuss the issue of God in OOP.
torswin Silver Snake Enterprise SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.19 22:53:00 - [25] Originally by: Amarria Black C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!!! There's nothing "magically" over the big bang theory, nor over abiogenesis or evolution. Once there's something supernatural involved it's basicly no longer a subject to science but philosophy (or pseudoscience when it's presented as "science"). And, there was no explosion involved in the Big Bang. The name is kind of misleading, as Big Bang was a rapid increase in spacetime from a very hot and very dense spot. --- Unless explicitly stated, this post does not represent my alliance, corporation, my own, or any other living organism's view.
Adonis 4174	Posted - 2008.01.20 00:06:00 - [26] Let's also not forget that atheism does not imply subscribing to the big bang theory in the first place. ---- Anything less is wasted effort
Rawr Cristina Caldari Cult of Rawr	Posted - 2008.01.20 01:25:00 - [27] Originally by: Adonis 4174 Let's also not forget that atheism does not imply subscribing to the big bang theory in the first place. Why is this so hard for some people to understand. I don't believe in some magical god person who made everything because one day he was bored but I'm also pretty skeptical about the Big Bang thoery (i mean, where did all that matter come from anyway?) I do believe in science, just like to keep an open mind rather than blindly accepting everything some people in white coats say like some religious zealot. WTS Moros
Sister Impotentata Elite Angels Of Death	Posted - 2008.01.20 04:04:00 - [28] This thread contains material on God. God is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of religion. This thread should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered. ----- TANSTAAFL Originally by: Professor Falken What you see here on these screens is a fantasy, a computer-enhanced hallucination! Those blips are not real missiles, they're phantoms!
Amarria Black Clan Anthraxx	Posted - 2008.01.20 05:23:00 - [29] Originally by: torswin Originally by: Amarria Black C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!!! There's nothing "magically" over the big bang theory, nor over abiogenesis or evolution. Once there's something supernatural involved it's basicly no longer a subject to science but philosophy (or pseudoscience when it's presented as "science"). And, there was no explosion involved in the Big Bang. The name is kind of misleading, as Big Bang was a rapid increase in spacetime from a very hot and very dense spot. I know, that pic is intended to be pithy and snarky, not a critical analysis of origin. I think I've had this discussion on this forum at least twice, so I'll give you the short version: let's go back to the very beginning, moment 0, then roll the clock back to second -1. What's there? There are a couple of options. It's possible (but highly unlikely) that nothing was there and that order truly can come from disorder, which pretty much throws established natural laws as we understand them right out the window. Or there was something so absolutely foreign to our current state that we have absolutely no conception of it, and modern science can't even begin to extrapolate anything about it from the detritus it left behind (aka our universe). Again, this would discard a lot of established science. Or something put the universe into its initial state and mashed the enormous cosmic "GO" button. Except for the something that actually did the organizing and orchestrating, this fits with existing scientific theory and law. Entropy applies, it doesn't require any wacky theories involving esoteric matter states that we've never seen and never will, it doesn't require mankind to have suddenly and spontaneously evolved from bananas. The reason your average atheist will reject this theory outright is that the concept of something putting reality here sounds a little too much like the Judeo-Christian God, who apparently touches future atheists in the naughty bits when nobody's looking. They fail to realize that something could be higher dimensional beings, or the one wholeness life-force that flows through all, or an incredibly complex computer simulation, or... well, God. This theory doesn't validate or invalidate any religion or religions, it merely states that the universe is by choice, as the odds of it being so by chance are disgustingly slim. Of course, none of this conjecture matters, because Haruhi will eventually get bored and our reality will be remade to better suit her whims. Originally by: Frug Your reputation has been entirely redeemed in my eyes. I now want your babies.
Rawr Cristina Caldari Cult of Rawr	Posted - 2008.01.20 07:56:00 - [30] It is now my belief that the egg in fact came before the chicken and not the other way round as originally percieved. WTS Moros
JiuTouNiao	Posted - 2008.01.20 08:51:00 - [31] Quote: pretty much throws established natural laws as we understand them right out the window I think the theory that we don't understand a whole lot about natural laws pretty much rounds up the problem. I belive we just sit in front of an interface and some buttons, the machinery is hidden.. Example: F1-F8 might pop that ship, and we understand that that is because we have the right turrets, skills, ammo and whatnot, but do we know the contents of the packets sent to the server? The packets that the server sends to our victim? Only very few people might, and they can only concieve it because the whole thing is manmade. So what's my point? Maybe ignorance is bliss? Not sure..
torswin Silver Snake Enterprise SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.20 08:56:00 - [32] Originally by: Amarria Black I know, that pic is intended to be pithy and snarky, not a critical analysis of origin. I think I've had this discussion on this forum at least twice, so I'll give you the short version: let's go back to the very beginning, moment 0, then roll the clock back to second -1. What's there? There are a couple of options. It's possible (but highly unlikely) that nothing was there and that order truly can come from disorder, which pretty much throws established natural laws as we understand them right out the window. Or there was something so absolutely foreign to our current state that we have absolutely no conception of it, and modern science can't even begin to extrapolate anything about it from the detritus it left behind (aka our universe). Again, this would discard a lot of established science. Or something put the universe into its initial state and mashed the enormous cosmic "GO" button. Except for the something that actually did the organizing and orchestrating, this fits with existing scientific theory and law. Entropy applies, it doesn't require any wacky theories involving esoteric matter states that we've never seen and never will, it doesn't require mankind to have suddenly and spontaneously evolved from bananas. The reason your average atheist will reject this theory outright is that the concept of something putting reality here sounds a little too much like the Judeo-Christian God, who apparently touches future atheists in the naughty bits when nobody's looking. They fail to realize that something could be higher dimensional beings, or the one wholeness life-force that flows through all, or an incredibly complex computer simulation, or... well, God. This theory doesn't validate or invalidate any religion or religions, it merely states that the universe is by choice, as the odds of it being so by chance are disgustingly slim. The problem putting in any god is that, which one? You have Thor, Jahve, Odin, Kali, Flying Spaghetti Monster, Sleipner, Freya, Satan, Seth, Rah, Allah, Jehova, the giant Holololo in the swamp etc. What makes YOUR god more probable than any other? And since science don't care about the supernatural, putting in any "god" will not help a bit. And, if god somehow created itself, why can't the universe? The third point is, if he/she/it did then he/she/it must have been an evil idiot with no sense of consequence. And btw, atheism just reject the supernatural. Nothing more, nothing less. And please tell me when this socalled god tickle my naughty bits as I haven't seen him/her/it. And entropy is not a problem for the big bang theory. And why put in god in anything unknown? It's so unscientific and doesn't explain anything. Well, prehaps if you're going to explain the universe to a three-year-old its easier to put in god into the whole soup and unfortionately the brainwash often starts there. The invisible, not touchable, non-observeable is remarkably close to what doesn't exist. --- Unless explicitly stated, this post does not represent my alliance, corporation, my own, or any other living organism's view.
Amarria Black Clan Anthraxx	Posted - 2008.01.20 09:09:00 - [33] Originally by: JiuTouNiao Quote: pretty much throws established natural laws as we understand them right out the window I think the theory that we don't understand a whole lot about natural laws pretty much rounds up the problem. I belive we just sit in front of an interface and some buttons, the machinery is hidden.. Example: F1-F8 might pop that ship, and we understand that that is because we have the right turrets, skills, ammo and whatnot, but do we know the contents of the packets sent to the server? The packets that the server sends to our victim? Only very few people might, and they can only concieve it because the whole thing is manmade. So what's my point? Maybe ignorance is bliss? Not sure.. Time to pull out my favorite drum and beat on it some more: Occam's Razor, Occam's Razor, Occam's Razor. Which is more probable: that what we believe to be physical laws are more or less correct, or that millions of discrete data all point us squarely at a law that is somehow fundamentally incorrect in regards to very specific large phenomena? Entropy never causes a system to move from a lower-ordered state into a higher ordered state. Were the universal timeline infinite, we should already be at a point of heat death. We're not, so either thermodynamics is entirely wrong or we're in a finite timeline universe. A finite timeline universe has a discrete beginning. So either something triggered that beginning, all matter and energy in the universe sprang forth from nothing, or we're back to throwing out the physical laws and starting over. Originally by: Frug Your reputation has been entirely redeemed in my eyes. I now want your babies.
Amarria Black Clan Anthraxx	Posted - 2008.01.20 09:50:00 - [34] Originally by: torswin The problem putting in any god is that, which one? You have Thor, Jahve, Odin, Kali, Flying Spaghetti Monster, Sleipner, Freya, Satan, Seth, Rah, Allah, Jehova, the giant Holololo in the swamp etc. What makes YOUR god more probable than any other? And since science don't care about the supernatural, putting in any "god" will not help a bit. And, if god somehow created itself, why can't the universe? The third point is, if he/she/it did then he/she/it must have been an evil idiot with no sense of consequence. I think you missed a part of what I said. The who and the why are completely immaterial. Thor, Mary Queen of Scots, and Raptor Ridin' Jesus could've joined forces to create the universe. Doesn't matter. Barring new evidence, all Creators are equally as probable. You're also making several assumptions here. First, that said Creator is supernatural. Nothing I've said supports that. Said Creator could very well operate by a finite set of natural laws that we have absolutely no comprehension of. It's no more supernatural than radioactivity pre-Becquerel. Second, you assume that said Creator created itself. Again, this is speculation on the who, which is immaterial. You're jumping on the anti-creationist bandwagon of strawman arguments against the specifics while ignoring the general theory. Originally by: torswin And entropy is not a problem for the big bang theory. Please explain further. Originally by: torswin And why put in god in anything unknown? It's so unscientific and doesn't explain anything. Well, prehaps if you're going to explain the universe to a three-year-old its easier to put in god into the whole soup and unfortionately the brainwash often starts there. The invisible, not touchable, non-observeable is remarkably close to what doesn't exist. First paragraph is an appeal to ridicule. It is no more unscientific to believe that a Creator had a hand in the creation of the universe than it is to believe that some guy in Detroit had a hand in the creation of your car. As to the invisible, non-touchable, and non-observable: prior to modern advances, germs, bacteria, and radiation were invisible, non-touchable, and only observable insomuch as one could view their impact on their surroundings. It may be remarkably close to non-existent, but there still appears to be a helluva lot of wiggle room between the two. We know nothing of said Creator, but we can observe his/her/their/its/* impact in that a universe exists which seems to contradict some of its own rules. So, either something set it up, negating the contradiction, or we don't understand the rules. Originally by: Frug Your reputation has been entirely redeemed in my eyes. I now want your babies.
torswin Silver Snake Enterprise SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.20 12:40:00 - [35] Creationism is not a scientific theory! Originally by: Amarria Black Originally by: torswin And entropy is not a problem for the big bang theory. Please explain further. I can't see how, could you please point out why it should be a problem? --- Unless explicitly stated, this post does not represent my alliance, corporation, my own, or any other living organism's view.
Amarria Black Clan Anthraxx	Posted - 2008.01.20 13:02:00 - [36] Originally by: torswin Creationism is not a scientific theory! It's no less a scientific theory than the wild-assed guessing that passes for non-creationist scientific theory about pre-origin. Both have the same amount of supporting evidence. TLDR: says you. Originally by: torswin I can't see how, could you please point out why it should be a problem? Well, assuming you're going for the infinite universe bang-crunch-bang-crunch cycle, entropy holds and the system eventually stops cycling assuming nothing's altering the system from the outside. (see also: Creator) That puts us back at square 1, being that we're not at heat death and should be. So, finite timeline model. Under a finite timeline model, sure, entropy won't actually effect the discrete event that is the Big Bang. However, this brings us back to the origin problems: what blew up? What existed prior to the bang? If nothing, then how did something come from nothing? If something, then how did it get there? BTW, a Big Bang event and creationism aren't mutually exclusive. Originally by: Frug Your reputation has been entirely redeemed in my eyes. I now want your babies.
torswin Silver Snake Enterprise SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.20 13:16:00 - [37] Asking what happend before the big bang is like asking "what change happend before the first change"? Time was not defined, as time can't exist without space (and vica versa). --- Unless explicitly stated, this post does not represent my alliance, corporation, my own, or any other living organism's view.
Twelve Jackals	Posted - 2008.01.20 16:41:00 - [38] Go watch 'the nines'
Twelve Jackals	Posted - 2008.01.20 18:32:00 - [39] Originally by: Amarria Black It's no less a scientific theory than the wild-assed guessing that passes for non-creationist scientific theory about pre-origin. Both have the same amount of supporting evidence. may i reccomend some richard dawkins? I ehard it helps against group delusions
Isiskhan Gnostic Misanthropy	Posted - 2008.01.20 18:58:00 - [40] Originally by: torswin Asking what happend before the big bang is like asking "what change happend before the first change"? Time was not defined, as time can't exist without space (and vica versa). Exactly. Some of these thread's posts carry the implicit assumption that time is some sort of an absolute and constant dimension that goes on independently of the state universe. As counter-intuitive as this may sound given the concepts that have structured our adult minds, with no universe there is no such thing as "time" or "space", therefore asking what was "before" it is both meaningless and misleading.
torswin Silver Snake Enterprise SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.20 21:17:00 - [41] Quote: it doesn't require mankind to have suddenly and spontaneously evolved from bananas I suggest an evolutionart biology class for you. Saying that is so ignorant and wrong... If you actually believe that then you shouldn't have passed the natural science class. --- Unless explicitly stated, this post does not represent my alliance, corporation, my own, or any other living organism's view.
Sokratesz Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.01.20 21:27:00 - [42] Originally by: torswin Quote: it doesn't require mankind to have suddenly and spontaneously evolved from bananas I suggest an evolutionart biology class for you. Saying that is so ignorant and wrong... If you actually believe that then you shouldn't have passed the natural science class. 'climbing mount improbable' Oh, thej oys of science.
Biolaja Tista Gallente Garoun Investment Bank	Posted - 2008.01.21 02:07:00 - [43] Pick your poison: 1) God creates Dinosaurs, God destroys Dinosaurs. God creates Man, Man destroys God. Man creates Dinosaurs, Dinosaurs eat Man. Women inherit the Earth. 2) I have seen the Face of God. And guess what? He blinked. 3) In the Beginning, there was Man. Then Man made the God. Thus did Man become the Architect of his own demise. 4) We were created for the intended purpose of glorifying God. We are primarily spiritual beings who are created to worship and glorify the Creator.
Amarria Black Clan Anthraxx	Posted - 2008.01.21 04:13:00 - [44] Originally by: Isiskhan Originally by: torswin Asking what happend before the big bang is like asking "what change happend before the first change"? Time was not defined, as time can't exist without space (and vica versa). Exactly. Some of these thread's posts carry the implicit assumption that time is some sort of an absolute and constant dimension that goes on independently of the state universe. As counter-intuitive as this may sound given the concepts that have structured our adult minds, with no universe there is no such thing as "time" or "space", therefore asking what was "before" it is both meaningless and misleading. The question isn't, "What happened before?" It's, "From whence?" The vocabulary may be lacking as far as defining the actual idea of the question as posed, as "time", "universe", "space", etc. have very mutable meanings. Your own post implies the existence of a state of non-universe. The question I've been asking all along is what happened to cause the state change from non-universe to our current state of universe? My wild-assed guess is that something gave it a push, based upon the simple rules which all systems seem to follow (IE that energy always flows toward a state of least order). Now, you can't just keep chanting, "You're wrong, you're wrong," and offer no counter-argument. So what idea or concept do you support which explains this change? Or do you not believe that any change took place? Originally by: torswin I suggest an evolutionart biology class for you. Saying that is so ignorant and wrong... If you actually believe that then you shouldn't have passed the natural science class. It was a joke. I'm well aware of the most likely evolutionary path of man. Originally by: Frug Your reputation has been entirely redeemed in my eyes. I now want your babies.
Dark Shikari Caldari Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2008.01.21 05:00:00 - [45] Creationism (not in the 6000-years sense) but in the idea that the universe was at some point created by God, is a philosophical argument, not a scientific one. It does not contradict science, nor can it be proven or disproven. Its a perfectly valid and unprovable statement to say "the universe was created 3 years ago in its present form." Its not scientific, but there's no evidence you can use to disprove it, therefore it is philosophical.
Isiskhan Gnostic Misanthropy	Posted - 2008.01.21 05:13:00 - [46] Originally by: Amarria Black Now, you can't just keep chanting, "You're wrong, you're wrong," and offer no counter-argument. So what idea or concept do you support which explains this change? Or do you not believe that any change took place? Again, with this philosophical concept of yours of a "change", you are implying a "before" (when the universe did not exist) and an "after" (when the universe exists), and with that an absolute and constant concept of "time" independent of the universe, since these "before" and "after" (in-between which your "creator" acted) are meaningless without it. The universe has existed in one form or another since the beginning of time, that is all we can scientifically say - after all "time" is a by-product of the universe. Talking about the state of "non-existence" of the universe, which is fundamental to even introduce the possibility of a "creator", is metaphysics, not physics.
Amarria Black Clan Anthraxx	Posted - 2008.01.21 06:23:00 - [47] Originally by: Isiskhan The universe has existed in one form or another since the beginning (if we can even talk about a "beginning") of time, that is all we can scientifically say - after all "time" is a by-product of the universe. Directly contradicts thermodynamics. Were the universe permanently present, it should already be well past heat death. Thusly, the universe must be impermanent. Originally by: Frug Your reputation has been entirely redeemed in my eyes. I now want your babies.
Mary Makepeace Caldari Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2008.01.21 10:40:00 - [48] Originally by: Amarria Black Originally by: Isiskhan The universe has existed in one form or another since the beginning (if we can even talk about a "beginning") of time, that is all we can scientifically say - after all "time" is a by-product of the universe. Directly contradicts thermodynamics. Were the universe permanently present, it should already be well past heat death. Thusly, the universe must be impermanent. not exactly true, there is opportunity for change in the rate at which the entropy increases, which could asymptoticly approach infinitely slow, therefore fullfill it's obligation to increase but never have begun.
Amarria Black Clan Anthraxx	Posted - 2008.01.21 11:09:00 - [49] Originally by: Mary Makepeace Originally by: Amarria Black Originally by: Isiskhan The universe has existed in one form or another since the beginning (if we can even talk about a "beginning") of time, that is all we can scientifically say - after all "time" is a by-product of the universe. Directly contradicts thermodynamics. Were the universe permanently present, it should already be well past heat death. Thusly, the universe must be impermanent. not exactly true, there is opportunity for change in the rate at which the entropy increases, which could asymptoticly approach infinitely slow, therefore fullfill it's obligation to increase but never have begun. Truth. But again, on an infinite timeline, any positive rate of increase of entropy would dictate that the universe will reach (and should already be at) a state of 0 free energy. (Oh, and I'm glad we're actually at the point of discussing the origin quandary and not stuck on "LULZ RELIGINZ AM DUM, REED DAWKINS NUB!" ) Originally by: Frug Your reputation has been entirely redeemed in my eyes. I now want your babies.
Seifer Al'Masy Caldari Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2008.01.21 17:46:00 - [50] in the end, it's all matter and anti-matter... who cares, anyway _____ "Take everything you can, give nothing back."
corroded	Posted - 2008.01.21 23:26:00 - [51] Subject matter is irrelevant. I am my god.
Sokratesz Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.01.21 23:42:00 - [52] Originally by: Amarria Black (Oh, and I'm glad we're actually at the point of discussing the origin quandary and not stuck on "LULZ RELIGINZ AM DUM, REED DAWKINS NUB!" ) I find that approach hilarious, then when you get them ****ed off properly, start the real debate.
LUH 3471	Posted - 2008.01.21 23:48:00 - [53] Edited by: LUH 3471 on 21/01/2008 23:56:44 ofc god exists god=truth=love=intelligence=peace=bliss=present moment=simplicity god ,that intelligence which cant be transcended anymore ,is our true self which is waiting to be discovered in each present moment so it cant be known becuase it is already known all the time - how else can it be - PLS LET ME KNOW PER EMAIL truth is very simple the only problem wiht us is that we are either living in the past or future but never in the here and now so we dont notice that we are already enlightened so how to get into that present moment ? the answer is simple bring your TPS (thoughts per second) down to 0 TPS even if it is a nano seocnd then you will be self realized and free of birth and death cycle what is this science called ? yog(a) the timeless science the science of the evolution of ones own consciousness this is true outside=inside you are drop in the ocean but ocean is also in you truth conauers all and truth is what shall set you free
Sharupak Minmatar Knights Of the Black Sun Brotherhood Of Steel	Posted - 2008.01.22 01:43:00 - [54] Originally by: Amarria Black Originally by: torswin Originally by: Amarria Black C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!!! There's nothing "magically" over the big bang theory, nor over abiogenesis or evolution. Once there's something supernatural involved it's basicly no longer a subject to science but philosophy (or pseudoscience when it's presented as "science"). And, there was no explosion involved in the Big Bang. The name is kind of misleading, as Big Bang was a rapid increase in spacetime from a very hot and very dense spot. I know, that pic is intended to be pithy and snarky, not a critical analysis of origin. I think I've had this discussion on this forum at least twice, so I'll give you the short version: let's go back to the very beginning, moment 0, then roll the clock back to second -1. What's there? There are a couple of options. It's possible (but highly unlikely) that nothing was there and that order truly can come from disorder, which pretty much throws established natural laws as we understand them right out the window. Or there was something so absolutely foreign to our current state that we have absolutely no conception of it, and modern science can't even begin to extrapolate anything about it from the detritus it left behind (aka our universe). Again, this would discard a lot of established science. Or something put the universe into its initial state and mashed the enormous cosmic "GO" button. Except for the something that actually did the organizing and orchestrating, this fits with existing scientific theory and law. Entropy applies, it doesn't require any wacky theories involving esoteric matter states that we've never seen and never will, it doesn't require mankind to have suddenly and spontaneously evolved from bananas. The reason your average atheist will reject this theory outright is that the concept of something putting reality here sounds a little too much like the Judeo-Christian God, who apparently touches future atheists in the naughty bits when nobody's looking. They fail to realize that something could be higher dimensional beings, or the one wholeness life-force that flows through all, or an incredibly complex computer simulation, or... well, God. This theory doesn't validate or invalidate any religion or religions, it merely states that the universe is by choice, as the odds of it being so by chance are disgustingly slim. Of course, none of this conjecture matters, because Haruhi will eventually get bored and our reality will be remade to better suit her whims. woops, I accidentally reported your post. disregard that ccp I thought your combo breaker was hilarious and I like the way you sort it out in your post. I would like to ad a bit to your summary, the possibility that it could be a bit of both...chance and by design. Linkage _______________________________________________ RuntimeError: ChainEvent is blocking by design, but you're block trapped. You have'll have to find some alternative means to do Your Thing, dude.

CCP Mitnal	Posted - 2008.01.22 07:13:00 - [55] Locked Spam. Mitnal, Community Representative EVE Online CCP Games Email/Netfang


Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.