Questions for Evolutionists

[Funkyterrance]

Haha, I like premio! We need more people like this to clear out the stagnant air in here. And don't bother, ye crepe hangers, your weapons are useless against him. Ahhahahhahahhahahahha!

[jonesthecurl]

The Evidence Bible? Seriously? By Franklin Graham, of all people. The guy who predicted that the Japanese Tsunami was the second coming of Christ.

So I should base my arguments against evolution by citing Hitler who justified killing millions because of his belief in a superior evolved race?

Why would you think anything in my post suggested that you cite Hitler? Is he really your go to guy on evolution?

I can suggest that you read A Brief History of Time for some of your physics questions- it's an excellent, but challenging book.

If you'd like to read a bit of modern evolutionary theory explained well, there's Dawkins work (read anything before the God Delusion- I would recommend The Selfish Gene, The Blind Watchmaker, and Climbing Mount Improbable), or Stephen Jay Gould's stuff.

“The fact that life evolved out of nearly nothing, some 10 billion years after the universe evolved out of literally nothing is a fact so staggering that I would be mad to attempt words to do it justice.” - Richard Dawkins, The Ancestor's Tale

Oh ... well that proves it then.

C'mon Juan, time to disband the GH. The jig is over.

Einstein stated very clearly why men wish to deny a Creator and replace Him with evolution. At age 34 a young Einstein stated:

"I have firmly resolved to bite the dust, when my time comes, with the minimum of medical assistance, and up to then I will sin to my wicked heart's content." (The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Princeton University Press, page 61)

Later in life just two months before his death in 1955, he said, "To one bent on age, death will come as a release. I feel this quite strongly now that I have grown old myself and have come to regard death like an old debt, at long last to be discharged. Still, instinctively one does everything possible to postpone the final settlement. Such is the game that nature plays with us." (The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Princeton University Press, page 63)

The "nature" Einstein spoke of was really his Creator whom he answered to at death. And so will we all.

I see: you know what Einstein was talking about better than Einstein did himself. Oooookay.

[jonesthecurl]

2. Where did matter come from?

Firstly, I'm not entirely sure this isn't the same as question 1...
but let's assume it's not.

Nobody so far as I know has anything more than speculation about this. It probably isn't even a meaningful question. The "Big Bang"starts things off (If the big bang theory is correct) . And no, it's not "all of a sudden something happened". This would be the first thing that happened. There is no "before". Therefore there is no "sudden".

[Symmetry]

2. Where did matter come from?

Firstly, I'm not entirely sure this isn't the same as question 1...
but let's assume it's not.

Nobody so far as I know has anything more than speculation about this. It probably isn't even a meaningful question. The "Big Bang"starts things off (If the big bang theory is correct) . And no, it's not "all of a sudden something happened". This would be the first thing that happened. There is no "before". Therefore there is no "sudden".

A good answer, and a similar one I think would be given if premio was asked who was before God? When did he suddenly happen?

[JJM]

Those first few Questions say it all, atheists deny what they deem unreasonable and then they replace it with something even more unreasonable.

Do you mean you couldn't read the whole post? I found it difficult myself, jim.
btw why the capital letter for "Questions"?

I read the whole post, I am just saying that those first few Questions some up the point. A religion is pretty much a theory on how everything came about, how the universe got here, how we got here. Citing just evolution might not have been the correct choice but say the "big Bang" ,evolution, and other Scientific theories could be categorized as a religion because they answer how everything came to be which is the point he was trying to make if I understand him correctly. I believe in my faith because of my knowledge of historical events that would be impossible to happen without a higher power, The way the world works ( Thomas Aquinas made a very good case for this in his argument from Governance of the World), and most of all my lifes experiences.

[Funkyterrance]

Those first few Questions say it all, atheists deny what they deem unreasonable and then they replace it with something even more unreasonable.

Do you mean you couldn't read the whole post? I found it difficult myself, jim.
btw why the capital letter for "Questions"?

I read the whole post, I am just saying that those first few Questions some up the point. A religion is pretty much a theory on how everything came about, how the universe got here, how we got here. Citing just evolution might not have been the correct choice but say the "big Bang" ,evolution, and other Scientific theories could be categorized as a religion because they answer how everything came to be which is the point he was trying to make if I understand him correctly. I believe in my faith because of my knowledge of historical events that would be impossible to happen without a higher power, The way the world works ( Thomas Aquinas made a very good case for this in his argument from Governance of the World), and most of all my lifes experiences.

Why do I find posts like this so refreshing? Oh yeah: because these forums are infested with poopie pants posters.

[Symmetry]

Those first few Questions say it all, atheists deny what they deem unreasonable and then they replace it with something even more unreasonable.

Do you mean you couldn't read the whole post? I found it difficult myself, jim.
btw why the capital letter for "Questions"?

I read the whole post, I am just saying that those first few Questions some up the point. A religion is pretty much a theory on how everything came about, how the universe got here, how we got here. Citing just evolution might not have been the correct choice but say the "big Bang" ,evolution, and other Scientific theories could be categorized as a religion because they answer how everything came to be which is the point he was trying to make if I understand him correctly. I believe in my faith because of my knowledge of historical events that would be impossible to happen without a higher power, The way the world works ( Thomas Aquinas made a very good case for this in his argument from Governance of the World), and most of all my lifes experiences.

They do not "some" up the point though do they? They're asking a creationist point entirely unrelated to evolution.

[JJM]

Those first few Questions say it all, atheists deny what they deem unreasonable and then they replace it with something even more unreasonable.

Do you mean you couldn't read the whole post? I found it difficult myself, jim.
btw why the capital letter for "Questions"?

I read the whole post, I am just saying that those first few Questions some up the point. A religion is pretty much a theory on how everything came about, how the universe got here, how we got here. Citing just evolution might not have been the correct choice but say the "big Bang" ,evolution, and other Scientific theories could be categorized as a religion because they answer how everything came to be which is the point he was trying to make if I understand him correctly. I believe in my faith because of my knowledge of historical events that would be impossible to happen without a higher power, The way the world works ( Thomas Aquinas made a very good case for this in his argument from Governance of the World), and most of all my lifes experiences.

Why do I find posts like this so refreshing? Oh yeah: because these forums are infested with poopie pants posters.

What are you trying to say. I summed up his point. Was I not correct?

[JJM]

Those first few Questions say it all, atheists deny what they deem unreasonable and then they replace it with something even more unreasonable.

Do you mean you couldn't read the whole post? I found it difficult myself, jim.
btw why the capital letter for "Questions"?

I read the whole post, I am just saying that those first few Questions some up the point. A religion is pretty much a theory on how everything came about, how the universe got here, how we got here. Citing just evolution might not have been the correct choice but say the "big Bang" ,evolution, and other Scientific theories could be categorized as a religion because they answer how everything came to be which is the point he was trying to make if I understand him correctly. I believe in my faith because of my knowledge of historical events that would be impossible to happen without a higher power, The way the world works ( Thomas Aquinas made a very good case for this in his argument from Governance of the World), and most of all my lifes experiences.

They do not "some" up the point though do they? They're asking a creationist point entirely unrelated to evolution.

I said that just mentioning evolution was not the correct choice but say the big bang theory. Is that not a theory about how the Universe came to be?

[Funkyterrance]

Those first few Questions say it all, atheists deny what they deem unreasonable and then they replace it with something even more unreasonable.

Do you mean you couldn't read the whole post? I found it difficult myself, jim.
btw why the capital letter for "Questions"?

I read the whole post, I am just saying that those first few Questions some up the point. A religion is pretty much a theory on how everything came about, how the universe got here, how we got here. Citing just evolution might not have been the correct choice but say the "big Bang" ,evolution, and other Scientific theories could be categorized as a religion because they answer how everything came to be which is the point he was trying to make if I understand him correctly. I believe in my faith because of my knowledge of historical events that would be impossible to happen without a higher power, The way the world works ( Thomas Aquinas made a very good case for this in his argument from Governance of the World), and most of all my lifes experiences.

Why do I find posts like this so refreshing? Oh yeah: because these forums are infested with poopie pants posters.

What are you trying to say. I summed up his point. Was I not correct?

I'm in support of whatever you're writing bud, keep it up! That's all I'm saying, no offense implied or intended.

[JJM]

oh. My bad. I didn't get the Refreshing part. sorry.

[Symmetry]

Those first few Questions say it all, atheists deny what they deem unreasonable and then they replace it with something even more unreasonable.

Do you mean you couldn't read the whole post? I found it difficult myself, jim.
btw why the capital letter for "Questions"?

I read the whole post, I am just saying that those first few Questions some up the point. A religion is pretty much a theory on how everything came about, how the universe got here, how we got here. Citing just evolution might not have been the correct choice but say the "big Bang" ,evolution, and other Scientific theories could be categorized as a religion because they answer how everything came to be which is the point he was trying to make if I understand him correctly. I believe in my faith because of my knowledge of historical events that would be impossible to happen without a higher power, The way the world works ( Thomas Aquinas made a very good case for this in his argument from Governance of the World), and most of all my lifes experiences.

They do not "some" up the point though do they? They're asking a creationist point entirely unrelated to evolution.

I said that just mentioning evolution was not the correct choice but say the big bang theory. Is that not a theory about how the Universe came to be?

Which is unrelated to the theory of evolution.

[JJM]

Those first few Questions say it all, atheists deny what they deem unreasonable and then they replace it with something even more unreasonable.

Do you mean you couldn't read the whole post? I found it difficult myself, jim.
btw why the capital letter for "Questions"?

I read the whole post, I am just saying that those first few Questions some up the point. A religion is pretty much a theory on how everything came about, how the universe got here, how we got here. Citing just evolution might not have been the correct choice but say the "big Bang" ,evolution, and other Scientific theories could be categorized as a religion because they answer how everything came to be which is the point he was trying to make if I understand him correctly. I believe in my faith because of my knowledge of historical events that would be impossible to happen without a higher power, The way the world works ( Thomas Aquinas made a very good case for this in his argument from Governance of the World), and most of all my lifes experiences.

They do not "some" up the point though do they? They're asking a creationist point entirely unrelated to evolution.

I said that just mentioning evolution was not the correct choice but say the big bang theory. Is that not a theory about how the Universe came to be?

Which is unrelated to the theory of evolution.

Citing evolution was the wrong choice but science in general explains why everything is the way it is, religion does the same thing.

[jonesthecurl]

So ALL of science is simply a guess based on faith?What do scientists DO all day then?

[Neoteny]

So ALL of science is simply a guess based on faith?What do scientists DO all day then?

We spend all our grant money on expensive coffee makers.

[chang50]

Those first few Questions say it all, atheists deny what they deem unreasonable and then they replace it with something even more unreasonable.

Do you mean you couldn't read the whole post? I found it difficult myself, jim.
btw why the capital letter for "Questions"?

I read the whole post, I am just saying that those first few Questions some up the point. A religion is pretty much a theory on how everything came about, how the universe got here, how we got here. Citing just evolution might not have been the correct choice but say the "big Bang" ,evolution, and other Scientific theories could be categorized as a religion because they answer how everything came to be which is the point he was trying to make if I understand him correctly. I believe in my faith because of my knowledge of historical events that would be impossible to happen without a higher power, The way the world works ( Thomas Aquinas made a very good case for this in his argument from Governance of the World), and most of all my lifes experiences.

Why single out atheists as believers in the theory of evolution, when not all do,and it is accepted by a majority of Christians?Also not all religions theorise the existence of a 'creator' to explain 'how the universe 'got here',and science is much broader than the study of 'how everything came to be'.I would not be inclined to trust your knowledge of historical events as a basis for faith if it is anything like the lack of knowledge displayed in your posts thus far..

[JJM]

So ALL of science is simply a guess based on faith?What do scientists DO all day then?

I never said that. Science answers questions about why things are the way they are. Religion does the same thing.

[jonesthecurl]

So ALL of science is simply a guess based on faith?What do scientists DO all day then?

I never said that. Science answers questions about why things are the way they are. Religion does the same thing.

They don't do it the same way. If they did, your contention would have some validity.

[JJM]

Those first few Questions say it all, atheists deny what they deem unreasonable and then they replace it with something even more unreasonable.

Do you mean you couldn't read the whole post? I found it difficult myself, jim.
btw why the capital letter for "Questions"?

I read the whole post, I am just saying that those first few Questions some up the point. A religion is pretty much a theory on how everything came about, how the universe got here, how we got here. Citing just evolution might not have been the correct choice but say the "big Bang" ,evolution, and other Scientific theories could be categorized as a religion because they answer how everything came to be which is the point he was trying to make if I understand him correctly. I believe in my faith because of my knowledge of historical events that would be impossible to happen without a higher power, The way the world works ( Thomas Aquinas made a very good case for this in his argument from Governance of the World), and most of all my lifes experiences.

Why single out atheists as believers in the theory of evolution, when not all do,and it is accepted by a majority of Christians?Also not all religions theorise how the universe 'got here',and science is much broader than the study of 'how everything came to be'.I would not be inclined to trust your knowledge of historical events as a basis for faith if it is anything like the lack of knowledge displayed in your posts thus far..

I SAID JUST CITING EVOLUTION WAS THE WRONG CHOICE. Science answers why things are the way they are. Religion answers why things are the way they are. And I don't know what leads you to question my knowledge of history.

[Symmetry]

Those first few Questions say it all, atheists deny what they deem unreasonable and then they replace it with something even more unreasonable.

Do you mean you couldn't read the whole post? I found it difficult myself, jim.
btw why the capital letter for "Questions"?

I read the whole post, I am just saying that those first few Questions some up the point. A religion is pretty much a theory on how everything came about, how the universe got here, how we got here. Citing just evolution might not have been the correct choice but say the "big Bang" ,evolution, and other Scientific theories could be categorized as a religion because they answer how everything came to be which is the point he was trying to make if I understand him correctly. I believe in my faith because of my knowledge of historical events that would be impossible to happen without a higher power, The way the world works ( Thomas Aquinas made a very good case for this in his argument from Governance of the World), and most of all my lifes experiences.

Why single out atheists as believers in the theory of evolution, when not all do,and it is accepted by a majority of Christians?Also not all religions theorise how the universe 'got here',and science is much broader than the study of 'how everything came to be'.I would not be inclined to trust your knowledge of historical events as a basis for faith if it is anything like the lack of knowledge displayed in your posts thus far..

I SAID JUST CITING EVOLUTION WAS THE WRONG CHOICE. Science answers why things are the way they are. Religion answers why things are the way they are. And I don't know what leads you to question my knowledge of history.

Science questions.

[JJM]

So ALL of science is simply a guess based on faith?What do scientists DO all day then?

I never said that. Science answers questions about why things are the way they are. Religion does the same thing.

They don't do it the same way. If they did, your contention would have some validity.

Correct. One is based on studies and experiments, while the other is based on stories, experiences and observation of the world. Before you say, that Religion has nothing to do with observations of the world, Thomas Aquinas made arguments from, World Governance, Movement and several other things. But you are correct they do answer Questions in different ways.

[JJM]

Science Questions

Religions got started by people asking Questions also.

[chang50]

Those first few Questions say it all, atheists deny what they deem unreasonable and then they replace it with something even more unreasonable.

Do you mean you couldn't read the whole post? I found it difficult myself, jim.
btw why the capital letter for "Questions"?

I read the whole post, I am just saying that those first few Questions some up the point. A religion is pretty much a theory on how everything came about, how the universe got here, how we got here. Citing just evolution might not have been the correct choice but say the "big Bang" ,evolution, and other Scientific theories could be categorized as a religion because they answer how everything came to be which is the point he was trying to make if I understand him correctly. I believe in my faith because of my knowledge of historical events that would be impossible to happen without a higher power, The way the world works ( Thomas Aquinas made a very good case for this in his argument from Governance of the World), and most of all my lifes experiences.

Why single out atheists as believers in the theory of evolution, when not all do,and it is accepted by a majority of Christians?Also not all religions theorise how the universe 'got here',and science is much broader than the study of 'how everything came to be'.I would not be inclined to trust your knowledge of historical events as a basis for faith if it is anything like the lack of knowledge displayed in your posts thus far..

I SAID JUST CITING EVOLUTION WAS THE WRONG CHOICE. Science answers why things are the way they are. Religion answers why things are the way they are. And I don't know what leads you to question my knowledge of history.

Perhaps your knowledge of history is superior to the nonesense you've posted thus far in which case I apologise.Science does not attempt to 'answer why things are the way they are',that is a philosophical question beyond the remit of science.

[jonesthecurl]

Science Questions

Religions got started by people asking Questions also.

Oh. I thought they were started by divine inspiration. So there's no gods involved in starting a religion then? Just people asking questions?

[Viceroy63]

1. Where did the space for the universe come from?

What does this mean?
the space that the universe is in is not separate from the universe. It is the universe.
If that "space" had "come from" somewhere, that somewhere would have already been the universe.

Without the universe there is no "where".

Are you envisaging a volume with no universe in it, waiting to filled with universe? And if so, why?

I truly have no idea what you are asking here.

That is precisely the point. No where is what existed before there was a universe. "Nowhere" and "Nothing!" No dimensions of anything either space or time. Einstein demonstrated that, not me.

What we think is empty space is really not empty at all but filled with particles that transcend space and time and in turn make up empty space. So where did the fabric of the universe, the empty space, come from?

If there was "Nowhere" then where did the "Big Bang" happen? This is what Science is asking. How did it come to pass that at some point in the space time continuum, There was "Nowhere" and "Nothing" and yet it somehow, all exploded?

As to the Universe being perfectly organized; How can there be some huge explosion of matter that created the Universe, the empty space and time and Matter/Energy, At temperatures so hot that apparently 13? billion years later the Universe still has temperature within the well organized galaxies and cluster of galaxies and stars.

There should not exist any galaxies at all when your think about it. Any explosion is disorder, not order. The Universe should have cooled down into nothing but dead space afterwards and not perfectly organized clusters of stars and galaxies. Yet here we are. Who wrote the rules that govern the universe? Why should there be rules in the first place.

As to combining all of these threads into one thread, I disagree. Everyone has a right to at least one thread. To deny this to anyone is just plain wrong. I don't know who suggested that? But you're wrong! Who ever you are.

And Premio; I applaud you for your acute scientific mind. Great post. I'll be sure to come here often.