Albert Einstein: God vs Science (believing, belief, religion, children)
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.
It is a person who becomes a fool for faith who rejects the evidence that it did indeed go 'bang' (in a vastly over simple analogy) because it doesn't seem to fit in a bronze age legend.
Give it up. You are on a hiding to nothing trying to prove a god of some sort (might not even be yours) by trying to discredit science by your rather selective and misplaced incredulity.
This is a futile debate.
There is a lot of material in space. To put it together would make one big chunk. Tell me using science:
Where did this big chunk of stuff come from? What made it go BANG, and what put it in such an order?
Here on earth alone, look at the order of things. It seems the BIG BANG made bees that flowers need. Trees and plants that give off oxygen humans, and animals need...which exhale what trees, and plants need.
It made a sun, that all things on the earth need…and put it the right distance away. The sun makes our weather…without we would be a dead world. All the wonders of this world, its life, and the order of the universe from a BIG BANG? Please, using your god of science explain this theory which has never been proven. I’m a simple man, but I am all ears.
There is a lot of material in space. To put it together would make one big chunk. Tell me using science:
Where did this big chunk of stuff come from? What made it go BANG, and what put it in such an order?
Here on earth alone, look at the order of things. It seems the BIG BANG made bees that flowers need. Trees and plants that give off oxygen humans, and animals need...which exhale what trees, and plants need.
It made a sun, that all things on the earth need…and put it the right distance away. The sun makes our weather…without we would be a dead world. All the wonders of this world, its life, and the order of the universe from a BIG BANG? Please, using your god of science explain this theory which has never been proven. I’m a simple man, but I am all ears.
How about the BILLIONS of other planets where life is not possible? Considering the odds, eventually, at least one will be in the proper position and environment to support it. The Big Bang didn't make bees or flowers or humans. I can see that you are a simple man.
God and science
by dhw @, Sunday, March 14, 2010, 19:10 @ David Turell
A SEQUEL
When the professor and Albert Einstein sat down, another student stood up.
“Professor and Mr Einstein,” he said, “as someone far less knowledgeable than yourselves, I must confess to finding both your arguments extremely confusing. For instance, Professor, you call yourself an atheist, but you began by trying to prove that God is not good and God created evil. These arguments concern God’s nature, not his existence, which implies that you think God exists. You then, however, cast doubt on the existence of Jesus and God because they are not perceivable by any of our senses. If these were the rules of “empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol” we would have to say that nothing exists or existed if it is not within the range of our senses. Mr Einstein has pointed out the folly of this argument, but Mr Einstein’s arguments are equally flawed. Cold, darkness and death are terms for phenomena that are perceivable by our senses; the argument that they all denote the absence of something does not make them any the less real, and the fact that our knowledge requires a degree of faith in our own or other people’s perceptions and experiences does not provide one jot of evidence for the existence of God. To call evil the absence of God is to presuppose God’s existence. It is not like the cold that comes when there is no heat, or the darkness that comes when there is no light, because we have a consensus of human perception and experience to support the existence of what we call cold and darkness, but we have no such thing to support the existence of God. To deny the evidence provided by a perceptional and experiential consensus would render all discussion meaningless, and to assert the existence of something on the grounds that other well-known phenomena are not accessible to our senses would be not only unscientific but also contrary to common sense. Neither of you has made out any case at all either for or against the existence of God.”
The student left the room, followed by all the remaining students, and leaving the Professor and Albert Einstein to contemplate the common sense of agnosticism. Indeed, we have it on good authority that Albert Einstein eventually became an agnostic. It is to be hoped that the Professor followed suit.
Yes, the great Albert Einstein.
Have you ever wondered why, Einstein was not used on the Atomic Bomb Project?
This Government gathered all the scientist in the country to develop the Atomic Bomb…which was based on Why would they not use Albert? Well, the man was not the father of . It seem after Albert received the Nobel Prize, of $50,000, his wife proved it was her who came up with the . Albert was told he should give her half the money if he wanted to keep the honor. He did like he was told…that is why he was not used on the Manhattan Project.
Lets see? What did Albert come up with?…oh yeah…theory this, and theory that. Theories are great things for men of science…they can’t be proven, and who can disprove them?
It’s like the theory, there is no God.
You challenge The Creator of all things with the hollow words of a dead criminal?
No. I'm challenging your concept of what it means to be good. If God claims to be good, and you accept that claim, then you must accept the goodness in everything he created and allows to be. I disagree with the idea that "God does all good and Satan does all evil." Satan is not God's equal and is under his control, as shown in the book of Job. The evil done by Satan is good, because it's part of God's plan.
Have you ever wondered why, Einstein was not used on the Atomic Bomb Project?
This Government gathered all the scientist in the country to develop the Atomic Bomb…which was based on Why would they not use Albert? Well, the man was not the father of . It seem after Albert received the Nobel Prize, of $50,000, his wife proved it was her who came up with the . Albert was told he should give her half the money if he wanted to keep the honor. He did like he was told…that is why he was not used on the Manhattan Project.
Lets see? What did Albert come up with?…oh yeah…theory this, and theory that. Theories are great things for men of science…they can’t be proven, and who can disprove them?
It’s like the theory, there is no God.
(those little square things are EMC squared.)
I urge you to post this in the Science and Technology threads. ASAP. Do it today!! Go for it! Please, please, pretty please share all of this on the Science forum.
Then we can see the responses from all the people who actually know what they're talking about.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,920,960 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by domenic
There is a lot of material in space. To put it together would make one big chunk. Tell me using science:
Where did this big chunk of stuff come from? What made it go BANG, and what put it in such an order?
Here on earth alone, look at the order of things. It seems the BIG BANG made bees that flowers need. Trees and plants that give off oxygen humans, and animals need...which exhale what trees, and plants need.
It made a sun, that all things on the earth need…and put it the right distance away. The sun makes our weather…without we would be a dead world. All the wonders of this world, its life, and the order of the universe from a BIG BANG? Please, using your god of science explain this theory which has never been proven. I’m a simple man, but I am all ears.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,920,960 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by domenic
Yes, the great Albert Einstein.
Have you ever wondered why, Einstein was not used on the Atomic Bomb Project?
This Government gathered all the scientist in the country to develop the Atomic Bomb…which was based on Why would they not use Albert? Well, the man was not the father of . It seem after Albert received the Nobel Prize, of $50,000, his wife proved it was her who came up with the . Albert was told he should give her half the money if he wanted to keep the honor. He did like he was told…that is why he was not used on the Manhattan Project.
Lets see? What did Albert come up with?…oh yeah…theory this, and theory that. Theories are great things for men of science…they can’t be proven, and who can disprove them?
It’s like the theory, there is no God.
Have you ever wondered why, Einstein was not used on the Atomic Bomb Project?
This Government gathered all the scientist in the country to develop the Atomic Bomb…which was based on Why would they not use Albert? Well, the man was not the father of . It seem after Albert received the Nobel Prize, of $50,000, his wife proved it was her who came up with the . Albert was told he should give her half the money if he wanted to keep the honor. He did like he was told…that is why he was not used on the Manhattan Project.
Lets see? What did Albert come up with?…oh yeah…theory this, and theory that. Theories are great things for men of science…they can’t be proven, and who can disprove them?
It’s like the theory, there is no God.
(those little square things are EMC squared.)
So, earlier Einstein was the basis of your argument for the existence of a god. I demonstrated that you shared false information, and then you proceed to defame him. That escalated quickly.
If you are interested in the truth about Einstein and the Manhattan Project, learn here:
But if you're interested in throwing out falsehoods in order to bolster your claims, then by all means just continue to click randomly about the Internet and share crazy things in your posts. That helps those who are reading understand just how much support there is behind what you believe and post.
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.
Why would they not use Albert? Well, the man was not the father of 
. It seem after Albert received the Nobel Prize, of $50,000, his wife proved it was her who came up with the 
. Albert was told he should give her half the money if he wanted to keep the honor. He did like he was told…that is why he was not used on the Manhattan Project. 
Go for it! Please, please, pretty please share all of this on the Science forum.
