Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have faith that our system for building bridges works. i have faith that how I see the universe working is more valid than "deny everything". My understanding of science help us produce cell phones. "Deny anything and everything because of how I feel about religion" produced nothing.
In fact, "deny everything" and "blind faith in dude died, woke up, and flew away" get to take the easy way out. they are cop outs. and "bash everything I don't agree with" is just mean.
The universe is chemistry. How can one understand the universe without understanding the element table? ...which contains unknown elements; "we know they must be there because of how they behave with other known elements".
from even simpler forms. And simpler and simpler ones until we are looking ar biochemicals sloshing about in a warm Archeon sea until one of them replicated. No. I didn't see it happen, and it probably won't show up in the fossil record. But given what we know about the early earth, that life first appeared in the sea and took a couple of billion years to appear on land, the biochemical building blocks of RNA and the fossil record of single cells, it makes a pretty good story.
What does creation have? No mechanism, just magic.
Yes, because not knowing means that claiming that you have faith in one of the possibilities (aside there is no decent evidence for it) is not a rational position. This is logic for kindergarten. If that seems disparaging, that's tough, because that's the way it is.
If you want to say you have Faith - fine. Just don't disparage those who don't.
If you want to say that you have Faith - fine; just don't say that you have logic and science on your side.
If you want to have faith and say that logic and science is mere human opinion - fine; just don't try to argue logic or science, ever again.
So, science still can’t tell us how life began. Why you think a creator is “magic”, I do not understand. But, at this point, the only logical conclusion is a creator, of some sort. I don’t need faith to understand that.
One might ask whether God is a living entity. If so, what logical option would you propose for the beginning of this life?
Are you proposing infinite causation? This ^^^ is a weak argument. The creator of anything is always greater than the created. It is entirely possible that the creator has always existed or exists outside of time as we know it. Some believe the universe may have always existed. Why is it considered a leap to believe the same about a creator?
Arguing with a fundie is akin to arguing with a doorknob. Except doorknobs have a better grasp of reality.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A creator/mover is the only logical conclusion, at this point. Science cannot tell us how life began.
