[Ninjer-sauce]

REGISTER TO REMOVE THIS AD

Yeah politics aren't what really annoy me, it's the pissy emotions it seems to bring out of people.
I just wish we could debate this normally, because Christians (I spelled it right =P) have a good bit of logic backing them up as well.

[bhamlaxy]

because Christians (I spelled it right =P) have a good bit of logic backing them up as well.

Of course they do! Because the bible answers all of our questions and is the 100% undeniable word of God.... Because the bible says it is correct! Therefore, it is correct! And we all know how logical it is for a rib to become a woman, the earth to be flat, and to base our beliefs on the science of 2,000 years ago.

[Ninjer-sauce]

Originally Posted by bhamlaxy

Of course they do! Because the bible answers all of our questions and is the 100% undeniable word of God.... Because the bible says it is correct! Therefore, it is correct! And we all know how logical it is for a rib to become a woman, the earth to be flat, and to base our beliefs on the science of 2,000 years ago.

Ouch...
Anyway, I don't like to place the meaning of the world in the hands of scientists, either. In my opinion, there are two branches of science: One is observational science which can be tested today, and the other wold be historical science which would be trying to fill in the holes concerning the origins of the world with theories based on what we know in the present. That's where evolution fits in.

The first one is undebatable: baking soda+vinegar = foams. That can be proven in the present.

The second kind of science cannot be proven to me like God cannot be proven to you. Just because an explanation makes sense does not mean that it is the only possible answer. Nobody was there at the beginning of the world, so it is foolish to claim that they know there was an explosion that formed the universe.

Not all religious people are the babbling drones I think you're accustomed to. Ever heard of Answers in Genesis? They're a group of scientists that use facts to point out many of the faults of evolution. It's great stuff. That's the information I used in my first post.
Edit: Here's a link http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/qa.asp

The bible is written figuratively in a lot of places. Add that to the fact that translations aren't unheard of and you have an insanely hard to understand mess. In the early King James editions, when Moses came down from Mount Sinai (sp?) and had the glow, the glow was translated as horns. So for a heck of a long time, people thought Moses grew horns when getting the 10 commandments.

[bhamlaxy]

The second kind of science cannot be proven to me like God cannot be proven to you. Just because an explanation makes sense does not mean that it is the only possible answer. Nobody was there at the beginning of the world, so it is foolish to claim that they know there was an explosion that formed the universe.

The amount of literal proof out there is astounding. Yes, science can prove what happened in the past. Looking at the rate of the expansion of the universe, and the different tendencies it has, it is almost certain that originated in some form of big bang. Even if it isn't 100%, there are dozens of logical, scientifically proven facts that support it. On the other hand, it is foolish to instead believe that a book, written when nothing was known about our universe (and thus contained many proven mistakes).

Not all religious people are the babbling drones I think you're accustomed to. Ever heard of Answers in Genesis? They're a group of scientists that use facts to point out many of the faults of evolution. It's great stuff. That's the information I used in my first post.
Edit: Here's a link http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/qa.asp

More Christian bull crap. It starts off with the classic "How can science prove the past if you weren't there" which of course doesn't answer the fact that scientific laws apply to the past as well. Then they go "So just read this special book that was written by people who had voices in their head, and learn the TRUTH- The earth is flat! Gay's are evil! And all women are walking rib creatures!"

I think Christianity and the bible in general are just human constructed attempts at social control. Think about it, the bible sets pretty clear and moral laws, attempts to establish itself as the sole authority, and tries to keep things nice and peaceful? Combine this with the fact that there are some questions that we will never know the answer to, which religions solve with a nice packaged up set of beliefs, easing your anxiety about existence. You have one nice attempt at a form of creating order in society. I think human societies all inevitably search for answers, which lead to these powerful churches capable of holding mass amounts of believers.

[npsi]

I'm not christian/catholic, and i really do not give a crap about the antichrist, heck, the messiah (christ=messiah) hasn't appeared yet, so why there is an antichrist? o.o

The 2012 prophecy may be lies or bs, but makes one think about it.

[Ninjer-sauce]

The thing is, the gaping flaws in the big bang theory prevent it from being a thorough enough explanation even for secular astronomers.
Here's a rough outline:
>In the beginning hot, dense matter
>Boom releasing mainly hydrogen and helium atoms
>Light atoms form clouds
>Clouds condense into stars

First, there is a beginning. Please do offer an explanation for a start out of nothing with science. Matter cannot be created nor destroyed.

The main stumbling block is the formation of stars from tiny atoms. The only molecule that could be formed would be H2 which would be destroyed in the ultra-violet radiation. Additionally, hydrogen usually needs a grain of dust to form a larger molecule. To get this dust, a pre-existing star must have exploded resulting in the presence of heavier elements to act as the base. You would also require energy to condense these stars. Where do we get the energy? Many scientists have explained it with...a star exploding! So, to form a star we need another star. It just doesn't work.

[DarkDrogon]

Originally Posted by Ninjer-sauce

The thing is, the gaping flaws in the big bang theory prevent it from being a thorough enough explanation even for secular astronomers.
Here's a rough outline:
>In the beginning hot, dense matter
>Boom releasing mainly hydrogen and helium atoms
>Light atoms form clouds
>Clouds condense into stars

First, there is a beginning. Please do offer an explanation for a start out of nothing with science. Matter cannot be created nor destroyed.

The main stumbling block is the formation of stars from tiny atoms. The only molecule that could be formed would be H2 which would be destroyed in the ultra-violet radiation. Additionally, hydrogen usually needs a grain of dust to form a larger molecule. To get this dust, a pre-existing star must have exploded resulting in the presence of heavier elements to act as the base. You would also require energy to condense these stars. Where do we get the energy? Many scientists have explained it with...a star exploding! So, to form a star we need another star. It just doesn't work.

Im not going to debate with bhamlaxy anymore but all i have to say is pwnt rep you if i could

[meimei]

=.= ..

This is just the same crap that people pull, saying that Obama is Muslim.. with all this crap floating around, it's going to be either McCain or Hillary.

I would rather have Obama.. he is nowhere near the anti-christ.. whoever makes these kinds of statements make me really upset- criticism about his foreign policy, campaign strategies.. fine.. but don't suggest these kinds of things that have weak backing.

He is a normal human being, just like all the other candidates. He's an inspiration, at least, he's inspired me. He's inspired so many people >< .. and sorry for being all emotional and whatever, but it's the first time I've seen so many people so actively involved in politics and hoping for change.

=_= it makes me upset to see people ruin the chance.

[lilguy]

First of all, enough crap about science versus religion.

Second of all, let me ask you guys this, does it matter if he's Anti-Christ?

Remember this little quote from the First Admendment?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ."

Now, think back to when you were still in history class and this quote comes up too:

"separation of church and state"

This is traced back to Thomas Jefferson writing a letter to the Danbury Baptists saying that religion shall not interfere with politics. However, America is so hypocritical as to not following the laws and rules laid down by our "founding fathers" that we take so much pride in. If you people truely cared about our politics, then there would be no discussion about religious views, even though "some" people running would take advantage of highly religious views in a political race.

End of my story.

[lightningX02]

Originally Posted by lilguy

First of all, enough crap about science versus religion.

Second of all, let me ask you guys this, does it matter if he's Anti-Christ?

Remember this little quote from the First Admendment?


Now, think back to when you were still in history class and this quote comes up too:

This is traced back to Thomas Jefferson writing a letter to the Danbury Baptists saying that religion shall not interfere with politics. However, America is so hypocritical as to not following the laws and rules laid down by our "founding fathers" that we take so much pride in. If you people truely cared about our politics, then there would be no discussion about religious views, even though "some" people running would take advantage of highly religious views in a political race.

End of my story.

Little guy from Vietnam is right. Religion is personal I think.. shouldn't matter in something like this unless the guy is extremist or something.

[lilguy]

Originally Posted by lightningX02

Little guy from Vietnam is right. Religion is personal I think.. shouldn't matter in something like this unless the guy is extremist or something.

On the side note, I'm not Vietnamese.

Chinese guy from New York >.>

[ChemicalOath]

I hate these kind of things, all they do is get people stressed out about most likely nothing. If he's the end of the world, wellp, we're screwed. If he isn't, yippie. Keep living for now anyway.

[lightningX02]

Originally Posted by lilguy

On the side note, I'm not Vietnamese.

Chinese guy from New York >.>

Oh my bad that kid on your sig looks from Viet... x.x

[Squeak]

Originally Posted by ChemicalOath

I hate these kind of things, all they do is get people stressed out about most likely nothing. If he's the end of the world, wellp, we're screwed. If he isn't, yippie. Keep living for now anyway.

That's my kind of philosophy. x3

[npsi]

Originally Posted by Ninjer-sauce

The thing is, the gaping flaws in the big bang theory prevent it from being a thorough enough explanation even for secular astronomers.
Here's a rough outline:
>In the beginning hot, dense matter
>Boom releasing mainly hydrogen and helium atoms
>Light atoms form clouds
>Clouds condense into stars

First, there is a beginning. Please do offer an explanation for a start out of nothing with science. Matter cannot be created nor destroyed.

The main stumbling block is the formation of stars from tiny atoms. The only molecule that could be formed would be H2 which would be destroyed in the ultra-violet radiation. Additionally, hydrogen usually needs a grain of dust to form a larger molecule. To get this dust, a pre-existing star must have exploded resulting in the presence of heavier elements to act as the base. You would also require energy to condense these stars. Where do we get the energy? Many scientists have explained it with...a star exploding! So, to form a star we need another star. It just doesn't work.

Good job, you proven the big bang theory to be wrong mr. hopkins
now explain me if God exist or not

Just that you remotely *pwn* (like said by our little 'tard DarkDrogon [maybe its an a]) doesn't mean that you can prove something right.

Go learn astrophyisics, get a degree in something, be far more greater than Steve Hopkins and then tell us if big bang is true or crap