Castanet

Necro wrote:
wow, way to "cherry pick"

seems ignorance really is bliss.

If you disagree, I'd like to hear why. Just demeaning someone while avoiding a response doesn't mean anything... well actually it does mean something... basic psychology, but you're smart enough to guess what it means, aren't you?

it is impossible for nothing to exist

what "nothing". are you talking about?

as this would include physical laws, time, and matter, as those are all something (let common sense be your friend.)

please site your sources.

If you believe everything in the Universe began from absolutely nothing with no outside force, then that's a bigger leap of faith than anything IMO.

you're right, santa. no the easter bunny, no, homer, nothing?

Hawking does not deny nothingness, nor does he contend that nothingness never existed, and there is a difference between the non-existence of matter and the non-existence of physical laws, google is your friend.

try again.

-fluffy- wrote:Ah, but you supply a third choice right there Sneaksuit. We can have the humility to accept that the real answer is so far beyond the grasp of our present knowledge as likely to remain unknown well beyond our lifespan, and that when found may well contain aspects of both science and spirituality. Science is fixated on the quantifiable and yet life as we know it contains much that defies analysis., yet exists anyways. Religion wants so much to believe its own version that it remains purposely blind to what is proven fact. "I don't know" is a phrase that's awfully hard for some people to pronounce, but strangely liberating once learned.

10/10!

as this would include physical laws, time, and matter, as those are all something (let common sense be your friend.)

Necro wrote:please site your sources.

You want me to site sources that those things are actually something? How about you site sources that they aren't?

-fluffy- wrote:Ah, but you supply a third choice right there Sneaksuit.

Thanks, I actually mis-phrased my post and you caught it.

Is there a definitive answer to when life went from eggs (hard shell, sit on type) to wombs for babies? How did that in between stage work out? Which museums have that fossil record so I can look at it?

Hmmm wrote:Is there a definitive answer to when life went from eggs (hard shell, sit on type) to wombs for babies?

I think they're still working on that one. The thought that each and every form of life that has existed to date must have left a fossil record may be fallacious.

Don't have to look at fossils when we have the duck billed platypus that is the last mammal to still lay eggs.

Poindexter wrote:Don't have to look at fossils when we have the duck billed platypus that is the last mammal to still lay eggs.

I don't follow your point. So science would teach that evolution would cause creatures that are all egg laying, change over time to start carrying babies in a womb, is that correct? Are there any womb carrying egg layers in the fossil record or alive today? Any explanation that's 100% proven science available?


For the record, I do believe in all science thats 100% proven and as much as many would have you believe, evolution is not. Many who teach and support it do use bullying techniques, as in the language they describe those who question it or don't agree with it. proof of that can be found throughout this thread.

Have you ever heard of a benchmark? When the benchmark is off, the final result is also off. Evolution's benchmarks or foundation are all speculative. How can the answers that come from a speculative benchmark be relied upon?

You want me to site sources that those things are actually something? How about you site sources that they aren't?

your rudimentary understanding of science, and the universe, borders on the ridiculous.

I'm sure Hawking would love to hear your "theories", nobel prize?

(sarcasm)

So science would teach that evolution would cause creatures that are all egg laying, change over time to start carrying babies in a womb, is that correct?

yes.

For the record, I do believe in all science thats 100% proven and as much as many would have you believe, evolution is not.

evolution is a proven scientific fact.

the theory of evolution is utilized to explain the fact of evolution.

religion, and creationists, are intellectually lazy, and incapable of the critical thinking required to understand the world around them, goddidit is irresponsible behavior, good for the church collection plates that support baby rapers.

Many who teach and support it do use bullying techniques, as in the language they describe those who question it or don't agree with it.

it's about bloody time people stood up to religion, as it is nothing more than a means for social and political control. I congratulate you on being a sucker, btw, I have a bridge for sale.....

Evolution's benchmarks or foundation are all speculative.

evolution is based on observable science, if you have "knowledge" you should be able to support it with evidence. Objective, verifiable evidence. Otherwise you are just being linguistically irresponsible or mistakenly confusing your beliefs, hopes, and fantasies, with reality ie; Claiming your delusions are "real".

your god is a fantasy, right up there with santa or the easter bunny.

Necro wrote:your rudimentary understanding of science, and the universe, borders on the ridiculous.

I'm sure Hawking would love to hear your "theories", nobel prize?

(sarcasm)

It's fascinating to see an ego expand at a faster rate than the universe. I was going to change my mind and say nothing must exist as that's what you add to the discussion... but insults are something so there went that theory.

I was going to change my mind and say nothing must exist as that's what you add to the discussion

the primary "necessity", god fulfills is the one some people have to manipulate and take advantage of others. The secondary "necessity", for god is to fulfill the desires for immortality of the gullible. The mechanics of the god belief are rather transparent.

Glen Beck made 80 millions dollars last year. Spreading lies isn't just irresponsible, it's big money.


http://mediamatters.org/video/2010/10/2 ... onk/172204

He's waiting for god to tell him we were monkeys once.

Might be waiting a while because if there is a heaven and hell, Glen Beck is going to fry.