The most important unresolved scientific questions, in my opinion.

[Yakuda]

If one is going by Genesis then God couldn't have created the other eyes, just the first one because Genesis is quite clear that creation happened once not multiple times over millions of years.

BUT, that being said, just "generally" suggesting "God created it" is unnecessary to explain it. So why hypothesize it? You have no evidence for it other than your fascination with the "complexity" but as noted earlier complexity can and does arise spontaneously in a system like this without the need of some intervention.

So why hypothesize "God" if that hypothesis is not needed to explain the data?

You havent shown the least that complexity arose spontaneously. That's your hypothesis. God doesn't create every baby that is born God created men and women that produce babies.

 

[Cypress]

Science never addresses why. Only how.

Yes, I know. A lot of people aren't aware, or don't understand, the distinction.

 

[Into the Night]

Nope. Saying it's unknown isn't the same as answering the question I asked.

Yes it is. RQAA.

I don't KNOW how the universe came into existence,

How do you know it had a beginning at all?

but if you asked which seems more probable - the Big Bang or being zapped into existence by the Sky Wizard, I would lean toward the Big Bang.

False dichotomy fallacy. There are numerous possibilities, not just those two.
Math error: Failure to declare boundary. Failure to declare randX.

A religion isn't mathematics, Void.

 

[Into the Night]

Wizards are dumb as an explanation, but the Big Bang wasn't actually the beginning of the universe. It was just the point at which expansion happened. It was preceded by an inflationary state, and nobody knows what the initial state of the universe was, or how it came to be, because we do not have the physics to tell us what was happening at the initial state.

Religion isn't physics, Sybil.

 

[Into the Night]

Take a physics or cosmology class. I'm not here to teach you for free. You need to do the hard work of learning yourself.

You aren't discussing either subject. Why are you attempting to pivot?

 

[Into the Night]

The hot Big Bang only tells us how the universe evolved, it doesn't explain why or how it was created. It's a mistake in logic to point to the Big Bang and assert it answers all questions about cosmic origin.

If we don't even know the right questions to ask, we don't have a chance of getting the right answer.

What 'Big Bang'? What makes you think the cosmos has an origin?

 

[Into the Night]

Science doesn't have an consensus answer on why and how the universe was created.

Science doesn't use consensus, Sybil. There is no voting bloc in science.

What makes you think the the Universe was created?

 

[Ross Dolan]

It's really not. There is significant reason to believe the earth is not close to being only 6,000 years old.

That is a cop-out.

The Earth being only 6000 years old is not a significant part of most religions these days. Religions get refined just as often as scientific enterprise does.

But you use of it reinforces my opinion that you have an agenda based on blind guesses about the REALITY of existence every bit as arbitrary as any theist.

 

[Ross Dolan]

You havent shown the least that complexity arose spontaneously. That's your hypothesis. God doesn't create every baby that is born God created men and women that produce babies.

Interesting blind guess about that "God.:

I wonder if it is even close to correct.

 

[Yakuda]

Science doesn't use consensus, Sybil. There is no voting bloc in science.

What makes you think the the Universe was created?

It seems to make people feel better that there is scientific "consensus" though.

 

[Hume]

That is a cop-out.

The Earth being only 6000 years old is not a significant part of most religions these days. Religions get refined just as often as scientific enterprise does.

But you use of it reinforces my opinion that you have an agenda based on blind guesses about the REALITY of existence every bit as arbitrary as any theist.

Why bother debating if you claim everything is a blind guess?

 

[Into the Night]

You havent shown the least that complexity arose spontaneously. That's your hypothesis. God doesn't create every baby that is born God created men and women that produce babies.

According to scripture, God created every baby that is born on Earth (or at least the spirit that inhabits it). He is the Father of all. This is why Christianity refers to each other as "brothers" and "sisters".

This duality of spirit and physical body is described in numerous scriptures. Together, they are called the "soul".

It is through God that the uniting of spirit and a physical body is possible. It is through God that the division of them is possible (death).
God brought both birth and death into the world, by offering Adam a choice to do so. It is through God that the reuniting of spirit with a physical body is possible (resurrection).

 

[Into the Night]

That is a cop-out.

The Earth being only 6000 years old is not a significant part of most religions these days. Religions get refined just as often as scientific enterprise does.

But you use of it reinforces my opinion that you have an agenda based on blind guesses about the REALITY of existence every bit as arbitrary as any theist.

Science does not specify any age of the Earth.

 

[Into the Night]

It seems to make people feel better that there is scientific "consensus" though.

But there is no such thing. Science is not a series of votes. It is a set of falsifiable theories. No vote needed, or even possible.

 

[Into the Night]

Why bother debating if you claim everything is a blind guess?

So you like debating blind guesses. Noted.

 

[Yakuda]

According to scripture, God created every baby that is born on Earth (or at least the spirit that inhabits it). He is the Father of all. This is why Christianity refers to each other as "brothers" and "sisters".

This duality of spirit and physical body is described in numerous scriptures. Together, they are called the "soul".

It is through God that the uniting of spirit and a physical body is possible. It is through God that the division of them is possible (death).
God brought both birth and death into the world, by offering Adam a choice to do so. It is through God that the reuniting of spirit with a physical body is possible (resurrection).

Their souls are created by God men and women create babies just the way God designed it.

 

[Yakuda]

But there is no such thing. Science is not a series of votes. It is a set of falsifiable theories. No vote needed, or even possible.

I didnt say there was such a thing but they believe there is, climate change being the prime example. Science has been raped leftists.

 

[Cypress]

What 'Big Bang'? What makes you think the cosmos has an origin?

Your mere presence lowers the IQ of the entire forum.

 

[Hume]

Your mere presence lowers the IQ of the entire forum.

He kills brain cells.

 

[Kafka]

You havent shown the least that complexity arose spontaneously. That's your hypothesis. God doesn't create every baby that is born God created men and women that produce babies.

I guess then the question of "why would a designer create a series of simple eyes early on but ONLY LATER develop more complex eyes? Why would a "designer" not create all eyes simultaneously?

The point being that we see this type of thing over and over in the fossil record. Simple life early on and the rise of more and more complex life later on as new environmental niches are exploited.

There is always the possibility that an invisible magician wandered across the earth making new life as each year passed but since we have no evidence FOR said invisible magician why propose it? Is it simply because you are unable to conceive of complex systems arising spontaneously in nature?

Arguing FOR the existence of God based on one's own ignorance is what leads to the "God of the Gaps" theology. Many theologians warn against this type of reasoning since it almost always results in God getting smaller and smaller as our knowledge grows.

Since there is zero evidence for an invisible magician making all the new life that shows up in the fossil record I see no reason to hypothesize such a thing.