Absolute, Irrefutable Evidence of a Creator

*sigh*

More creationism bs!

Originally posted by PublicDefenseCorp
reply to post by spellbound

 

It's not a miracle to see plants, and animals.
The hell is wrong with you people?

Originally posted by randyvs



creationists open their minds to all that is around them,

No, they don't.

because everything around them was created.

No evidence of a god.

atheists close their minds to everything that was created,
as if everything was created around them.

Wrong again! It's thiests who are claiming god created them because they are so special!

this is all i have to say.

You don't have much to offer except your narrow minded opinion.

[edit on 5-9-2009 by john124]

Dear OP, The Christian magazine "creation" presents very worthy evidence against evolution, and thought they try to sell this as evidence for A creator, they have at least done a far better job than you so far.
I have not been clearly presented with any evidence of a Creator, let alone Absolute or irrefutable. I like it when people support what they say, and don't refer me to moronic statements in a video. IF there is some quality evidence in those videos please tell me the video# & title, so I don't have to listen to any more moronic statements.


Support for my claim of moronic statements

Nassim Harameins (his name according to moocowman), says the center of the pyramid is 1/4 inch off dead center. he compares this to the 2,300,000 stones that make up the pyramid. I think comparing distance to a quantity of stones is.... moronic, but it gets worse as he starts comparing it to modern engineering abilities:

"in fact there is no way that engineering companies on this planet could ever reproduce that" ... "If we give them billions and billions of dollars, they couldn't come up with anything like that"

Nassim, If we paid them billions and billions of dollars, they would blow that 1/4 inch accuracy right out of the water, and make it more like 1/4 millimeter (or possibly a micrometer if everyone is getting paid millions). Even if the engineers started spending their new-found-million-dollar-salaries on getting permanently drunk they would still make it within 1/4 cm. Thank goodness Nassim Isn't making skyscrapers.. Hey mayyybe HE made the WTC? THAT is why they freefalled! Damn, Ive solved it! After causing permanent tissue damage to my BS filter, he attempts to get a second wave of stupidity past my intellect. This is what he says, the exact words:

"our most accurate buildings like, um, telescopes, are not that accurate, they're not even close to having that kind of accuracy

Well FINALLY we know why NASA smudged all those photos; they tried to make a building, that became a telescope, with 1/4 inch accuracy. Their super- expensive telescopes just took loads of pictures of blurred turd from all over the galaxy. They had to smudge over their own scientific debacle, and cut & past using childrens drawings. They can't even make their telescopes CLOSE to that 1/4 inch.

Absolute, Irrefutable evidence of a Creator of absolute stupidity. I give you the proof: I give you the words of Nassim Harameins.
Do NOT let that man become an eye surgeon.

Originally posted by brightlight
reply to post by spellbound

 

Spell,

I've finished the series, 7 parts to it, and I am sold, that is why I used the word irrefutable, but I do understand what you speak of, I'll explain below.

That is not what irrefutable means. If it means that you can't refute it, then we have to allow for the possibility that it is not due to the argument being irrefutable but rather to your lack of ability to do so.

In terms of your comment, it is more of a blocking mechanism that is employed by the unbelievers to this divine proof of a Creator and His work. It is a conscience decision made by them, it is their free will to choose -- that is the essence of a human being. Do they not have eyes to see, ears to hear, a brain to think on matters of such significance? Surely there are bountiful signs for those who reflect. Great epiphanies are reality in this world to those who ask, who open up to it, have a good heart and are surely being guided.

So us being unconvinced by this is not because of the weakness of the arguments but because we refuse to see how irrefutable it is? This pretty much is the old argument "Lack of evidence is proof of a conspiracy" dressed up in different language.

It is absolutely imperative for one's heart to be open in order to find, discover and embrace the sincerity of the Creators glorious, perfect, and infinitely beautiful creation.

And just as imperative that you mind be open to the possibility that what you have been told is a load of bull on the level of the charlatan who claims to have caused an eclipse - in other words, the proponents of your religion are taking credit for the "glorious, perfect, and infinitely beautiful creation" as a work of their god to justify their bloodthirsty, intolerant and violent doctrines.


[edit on 5-9-2009 by metamagic]

Originally posted by brightlight
Absolute, Irrefutable Evidence of a Creator

So that my disposition of this is not misconstrued, I do in fact believe in some sort of ultimate Creator, be that the entity of one, or a conglomerative of entities with all power. I do not believe I am here as an accident.

That said .........

The ONLY Absolute, Irrefutable Evidence of a Creator would be that said Creator reveals itself to all humans, and proves it by creating in front of all eyes.

Anything else, is wholly conjecture.

Originally posted by john124

Originally posted by randyvs



creationists open their minds to all that is around them,

No, they don't.

because everything around them was created.

No evidence of a god.

Define "G-D" and then define the evidence that was presented to refute the existence of such, please.

And, if you don't mind, don't insult my intelligence by defining it as an anthropomorphic entity that doesn't appear on command as you would like it to. I think most of us are above thinking that G-D is a genie in a bottle.

atheists close their minds to everything that was created,
as if everything was created around them.

Wrong again! It's thiests who are claiming god created them because they are so special!

Theists do not claim G-D created them because they are so special. Where did this notion come from? They may believe that because G-D created them they are special, but I don't think anyone believes that they were special first then G-D created them.

this is all i have to say.

You don't have much to offer except your narrow minded opinion.

[edit on 5-9-2009 by john124]

Narrow can be defined as a small space, or even a hyper-focus. This is excellent when taking a tiny portion of something and working your way through an understanding of it. When you take a concept as large as the Universe and then apply our limited scientific experiments that is narrow-minded as well. You can't spend even eighty years researching what happened over the course of billions and think your focus is wide enough to have uncovered everything.



[edit on 5-9-2009 by A Fortiori]

[edit on 5-9-2009 by A Fortiori]

[edit on 5-9-2009 by A Fortiori]

[edit on 5-9-2009 by A Fortiori]

Originally posted by debunky
reply to post by Dark Ghost

 

I don't know if any propability stuff comes later, because i too stopped halfway trhough part 3, but in case it does:

The propability for the universe existing is 100%. The propability for life on earth is likewise 100%. If you honestly think that there is a chance that you don't exist I suggest seeing a professional about it.

Sure: earth is neither to hot, nor to cold for us, nor to bright nor to dark: but if it was you would have fur and your eyes would be bigger/use sonar like bats. And you would think exactly the same thing.

That's not the most convincing argument though it's true. It's sort of like me rolling a set of dice and then saying, look I rolled 12. The probability of me rolling 12 just then was 100%. But most people agree the probability we look at is based on before the event transpired which was actually 8.333%. It's only 100% in hindsight. So if you want to compare apples to apples for things we don't know about and things we do then you have to go back to a time before any of the events transpired.

Yes, it's true if you had a model cosmos and all the data available in a computer and could simulate all that data, and there is no chance for absolute randomness, you could say with certainty that there's a 100% chance of earth being formed and us living on it. But you could also do the same with God (if a God exists and we knew about one.) You could do the same thing with any true concept, whether known or unknown. Any true concept whether known or unknown has exactly a 100% chance of being true. It doesn't tell us anything about what is true and what is false.

Is that really helpful knowledge or does it just muddy the waters?

Your last paragraph I quoted I believe has some value however.

[edit on 5-9-2009 by theyreadmymind]

Originally posted by spellbound
reply to post by brightlight

 

How can people not see the miracles all around?

The miracle of a flower, an animal, a human, a tree, a river, a lake. The miracle of a new baby being born?

And all the vegetables and fruits given to us?

Sadly, some people will persist in not seeing that miracle, and if they don't see, that is the end.

reply to post by Copernicus

 

It is still magical.

Put it down to what you will.

How come these things happen - is it aliens, a creator, or who? There has to be something there that causes these things. People do not cause them, so who does?

www.quotationspage.com...

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

Arthur C. Clarke, "Profiles of The Future", 1961 (Clarke's third law)
English physicist & science fiction author (1917 - )

I have seen many debates on Creationism vs Evolution and most of the time the creationist argument comes down to "Nothing cannot come from nothing". This is a VERY ill-informed opinion. Quantum physics and membrane theory have taken the first steps of partially solving what occurred before the "Big Bang" ie: solving the 'nothing' puzzle. It seems though, unfortunately, that the creationist perspective does not take these theories into account when pidgeonholing the opposing opinion into a "nothing cannot come from nothing" argument.

I personally believe that we were created/engineered by an ancient alien race - stories of Gods from many different cultures all seem to fit the category nicely and it is only a matter of time before all the pieces come together and humankind discovers it's real origins. When this occurs it will be a marvellous time to exist in indeed!

[edit on 5/9/2009 by Kryties]

Originally posted by Kryties
the creationist argument comes down to "Nothing cannot come from nothing".

Until that same argument from non-believers is reversed on the creationist: "then where did God come from", which always ends in the creationist point that humans can not comprehend that God was always there, that it should just be accepted with faith. That last word is the root of it all, it takes faith for a human to believe in a creator, faith can not be proven.

It's a never ending circle, and I really don't know why the two groups - believers/non-believers - continue to spend all their energy trying to convince the other of their truth.
It's tantamount to trying to convince a life-long Ford buyer that Chevy is better (but we all know Ford is #1 )

As for aliens being the creator of humans ........ I just don't see why not
My mind thinks this ........... if the mind can think it, it can be true.

[edit on 9/5/2009 by Misfit]

Nice Vids.
I liked what they said about Dawkins, his books seems to be nothing more than an attack on religion...Some thing along those lines ..

Great find,. S&F

reply to post by Kryties


But what if G-D is the string? What if G-D is the universe? Then all of these theories are actually proving its existence. What if the logic is actually sentience? Why does G-D necessarily have to have a body and or surname to be G-D? What if it is all design by matter itself?

The problem is that people see it as "creationism" versus "science" and I see that as a byproduct of the human brain perceiving everything through the human lens.

If you take a glass of water and pour it into the ocean it ceases to become your glass of water, but its still that same water just in a bigger mass that can absorb it. If someone comes and scoops water in that same glass an infinitesimal amount of that original water is still in that glass.

In this analogy G-D is the ocean, we are the original water. We can be subsumed into G-D but we are still ourselves whilst we belong to what is G-D.

All of these discoveries show that there is order in the chaos, that there is logic in the makeup, and that shows consistency to me.

reply to post by A Fortiori


Lets say God was matter and God was also antimatter then the two came together and annihilated each other. Why would God wish to destroy him/her/itself? And to what purpose?

reply to post by theyreadmymind


But we do know that you rolled a 12
And since you said i will roll these dice until i get a 12 and if I dont get a 12 we won't count it (our cosmic egg doesnt splode for example) your chance of getting a 12 is 100%.

The questions are where and when. Where is here, when is now. Can't be anywhere else or anywhen else.
The whole impropable thing only gets interesting again when we look at lifeforms on other planets/other universes.

reply to post by Kryties


Then there would be a "nothingness" and that nothing would be something.

reply to post by Copernicus


welll, if you say the aliens are the "gods" then who created the aliens????

reply to post by mellisamouse


Who says they were created? They may have evolved over a long period of time, perhaps having been spliced off another alien genome even longer ago and so-on and so forth back into the infinite reaches of universal history.

while I hate religion completely, and think it is absolutly a BUNK bunch of CRAP.....

Science even shows us an ENERGY that animates EVERYTHING.....I call that the creative FORCE......if that makes sense.......

I made a few videos about it.......funny I believe in a creative FORCE, yet most religioulous types can't stand me and act like I am de debil!

reply to post by debunky


Which is why we can't compare the probability of knowns to the probability of unknowns unless we agree on some fundamental level of equal knowledge. It's not fair for example for me to roll a die and say there was a 100% probability of me rolling a six because I rolled it. Then give you a die and ask you to tell me the probability of your die roll being a six before you roll it. Now my die roll is 100% likely and your die roll has a 16.6% probability. Now can we tell people I'm a better roller than you are?

On the other hand, I haven't seen the video and neither did the first guy. So it may very well be the hypothetical comparison in question could be flawed for any number of reasons. I just wouldn't throw a blanket statement around like this without hearing the proposal first.

[edit on 5-9-2009 by theyreadmymind]

reply to post by brightlight


The question is not of the existence of a creator, the question is why the creator, the divine one binded you to this physical manifestation.

Please stop reffering to the one as he/she.

The physical universe is a living entity with a mind, and was created, HOW is that even possible?

Here's a question when nobody with conciousness is looking at the moon, it's still there...... (What knows it's there?)

[edit on 5-9-2009 by Psychonaughty]