Once you eliminate the impossible...

The Ugly Truth said:
Everything physical has a beginning.
Click to expand...

I understand that you want to get away with asserting that without actually establishing it.

It is not going to work.

The entirety of "everything physical"...may ALWAYS HAVE EXISTED. Get that through you brain...and stop insisting that it had to have a beginning, because that is not something you can establish.

It is impossible for something physical to be preexistent and eternal.
Click to expand...

How the hell do you know that to be a fact?

HINT: You DO NOT KNOW IT...you are merely asserting it without having established it.

Get over yourself, Ugly.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
you have some odd beliefs for someone who has no beliefs.......
Click to expand...

PostModernProphet, you persist in a very odd belief, that being that atheists have no beliefs.

I am an atheist and I have many, many beliefs ... and ... there are many things in which I do not believe.

In regard to atheism, gods are unbelievable.

Do you believe in Astrology or is it unbelievable to you?
.
 
Frank Apisa said:
What does that have to do with what is being discussed?

But in a way...I sorta agree with you...although I am sure there are many atheists here who would not.

Some atheists (especially the ones who post on the Internet in these forums) claim they are not denying the existence of a deity...but are merely asserting that they do not "believe" one exists. (That is not the same as asserting that one does not exist.)

I am someone who does not "believe" a deity exists...but I am not an atheist.

I also do not "believe" there are no gods.

I simply do not do have a belief in either direction on the question.

As I said, however, that is not what was being discussed.
Click to expand...

its a bit unclear what is being discussed......is the issue whether the root of the word atheist is greek or latin or is the issue what atheism means..........you are certainly wrong about the latter......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
you have some odd beliefs for someone who has no beliefs.......
Click to expand...

PostModernProphet, you persist in a very odd belief, that being that atheists have no beliefs.

I am an atheist and I have many, many beliefs ... and ... there are many things in which I do not believe.

In regard to atheism, gods are unbelievable.

Do you believe in Astrology or is it unbelievable to you?
.
 
hypGnosis said:
PostModernProphet, you persist in a very odd belief, that being that atheists have no beliefs.
Click to expand...

that is certainly an odd perversion of what I have said......atheists have many incorrect beliefs......

In regard to atheism, gods are unbelievable.
Click to expand...
no.....you may choose not to believe......that does not mean it is unbelievable.....

Do you believe in Astrology or is it unbelievable to you?
.
Click to expand...
I do not choose to believe in astrology......
 
Frank Apisa said:
I understand that you want to get away with asserting that without actually establishing it.

It is not going to work.

The entirety of "everything physical"...may ALWAYS HAVE EXISTED. Get that through you brain...and stop insisting that it had to have a beginning, because that is not something you can establish.



How the hell do you know that to be a fact?

HINT: You DO NOT KNOW IT...you are merely asserting it without having established it.

Get over yourself, Ugly.
Click to expand...

What I said is backed up by science. The law of causality. There are no known exceptions. Something physical cannot exist without something else causing it to exist. It is similar to the law of biogenesis. Life comes only from life. Another scientific fact. You can claim that life evolved from lifeless chemicals and call it science. But you'd be wrong. This is what you are doing. Claiming that something always existed, without any evidence whatsoever.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
its a bit unclear what is being discussed......is the issue whether the root of the word atheist is greek or latin or is the issue what atheism means..........you are certainly wrong about the latter......
Click to expand...

I am absolutely NOT WRONG about the latter...because the discussion was not about what the meaning of "atheist" is.

I might point out that various dictionaries give different meanings for the word...the two most common being:

1) Someone who asserts there are no gods...or who asserts a "belief" that there are no gods.

2) Someone who assert a lack of belief in a god.

The first is an actual "belief"...the second is merely a lack of a "belief."

As for how "atheism" was derived...I have been right on the money. It derived from the Greek through the French...specifically "a" (without) + "theos" (a god) and means "without a god."

Some atheist argue that the derivative was "a" (without) + "theism" (a belief in a god) and means "without a belief in a god."

The former is the proper derivative.

That was what was being discussed.
 
The Ugly Truth said:
What I said is backed up by science. The law of causality. There are no known exceptions. Something physical cannot exist without something else causing it to exist. It is similar to the law of biogenesis. Life comes only from life. Another scientific fact. You can claim that life evolved from lifeless chemicals and call it science. But you'd be wrong. This is what you are doing. Claiming that something always existed, without any evidence whatsoever.
Click to expand...

I am NOT claiming that at all.

I am claiming that it is POSSIBLE.

But you, in your infinite wisdom...are saying it is not possible.

You should not be citing science. You are not good at it.
 
Fine, I'll accept your revision of your expressed opinion of “atheists have no beliefs”[quoted] to “atheists have incorrect beliefs”.

As an aside, it is not my choice to not believe in gods, but rather the utter lack of evidence supporting the existence of gods anywhere, except in people's imaginations.

If you think you are capable of choosing to believe things, then sobeit, I don't care.

I don't want to go off on that tangent any more than I want to elaborate on the origin of the word atheist. I want to see if this thread can come to a resolution.

I've copied & pasted a snippet from the Wikipedia article on “Big Bang”, viz.

“The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological model for the universe from the earliest known period ...

The model describes how the universe expanded from a very high-density and high-temperature state, and offers a comprehensive explanation for a broad range of phenomena, including the abundance of light elements, the cosmic microwave background (CMB), large scale structure and Hubble's law.

If the known laws of physics are extrapolated to the highest density regime, the result is a singularity which is typically associated with the Big Bang.

Physicists are undecided whether this means the universe began from a singularity, or that current knowledge is insufficient to describe the universe at that time.

Detailed measurements of the expansion rate of the universe place the Big Bang at around 13.8 billion years ago, which is thus considered the age of the universe.

Since Georges Lemaître first noted in 1927 that an expanding universe could be traced back in time to an originating single point, scientists have built on his idea of cosmic expansion.”

Aside from the estimation of the age of the Universe, is there anything in the snippet with which you disagree?

Are we “on-the-same-page”?
.
 
The Ugly Truth said:
Frank Apisa said:
I am NOT claiming that at all.

I am claiming that it is POSSIBLE.

QUOTE]
So, do you agree that it is impossible for something to create itself?
Click to expand...

I have no idea if there is anything that can "create" itself...and neither do you...nor any scientist worth the name.

If everything that exists has always existed...it doesn't really much matter. And for certain, I do not know if "everything that exists"...has always existed or not.

NEITHER DO YOU, Ugly.

Get over it.

Stop merely asserting things without substantiation.
Click to expand...
 
Frank Apisa said:
2) Someone who assert a lack of belief in a god.
Click to expand...

the only people who claim that is a definition of atheist are atheists who are tired of explaining why they are stupid enough to insist something they cannot prove is true while espousing the claim it is wrong to believe things that cannot be proved........
 
Frank Apisa said:
The Ugly Truth said:
I have no idea if there is anything that can "create" itself...and neither do you...nor any scientist worth the name.

If everything that exists has always existed...it doesn't really much matter. And for certain, I do not know if "everything that exists"...has always existed or not.

NEITHER DO YOU, Ugly.

Get over it.

Stop merely asserting things without substantiation.
Click to expand...

do you realize that your entire contribution to this discussion exists of 'we can't discuss this"?......
Click to expand...
 
Frank Apisa said:
The Ugly Truth said:
I have no idea if there is anything that can "create" itself...and neither do you...nor any scientist worth the name.

If everything that exists has always existed...it doesn't really much matter. And for certain, I do not know if "everything that exists"...has always existed or not.

NEITHER DO YOU, Ugly.

Get over it.

Stop merely asserting things without substantiation.
Click to expand...

I'm not making assertions. By every single bit of observational data we possess, it is impossible for something to create itself. Even without that, there is the law of causality. Every scientists believes this law. Without it, science itself cannot exist.
Click to expand...
 
kudzu said:
This may help......

Within the Christian world, creationism was once widely believed to be true, but since the mid-19th century evolution by natural selection has been established as an empirical scientific fact.

The debate is philosophical, not scientific: in the scientific community, evolution is accepted as fact and efforts to sustain the traditional view are almost universally regarded as pseudoscience. While the controversy has a long history, today it has retreated to be mainly over what constitutes good science education.
Click to expand...

Evolution and creation,is looking at the same thing thru two different lens
 
The Ugly Truth said:
[

I'm not making assertions. By every single bit of observational data we possess, it is impossible for something to create itself. Even without that, there is the law of causality. Every scientists believes this law. Without it, science itself cannot exist.
Click to expand...

You are making less and less sense with each post.

You are making assertions. You have no idea if it is impossible for something to create itself...and if you google it, you will see that the question has many different directions to take.

THE UNIVERSE may have always existed. Try to live with that.

Why not stop while you are only very far behind?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top