First, there is no evidence that a god sparked the big bang. Second, why is a god any better an explanation to you that a big explosion. What created the god if it sparked the explosion? If your excuse is that god always was, could not the same thing be said for the pure energy that sparked the big bang?

Third, There is only one earth that we know of. There are likely many other similar planets. We just can't see them.

Fourth, life is pretty resilient, if earth was a little different, life would have formed differently to adapt to that environment. We are how we are, because earth is as it is.

You're wrong, it has been shown. This line is the propaganda spew of creationists that has absolutely no factual backing.
Evolution 101
29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: the Scientific Case for Common Descent


A big bang would have started with pure energy. Because E = MC^2, pure energy could create matter. While we don't know why there was massive amounts of pure energy yet, we know that it set of a big bang.

There is no need for a god, there just needs to be the energy. Why do you believe a god is necessary for there to be energy, when there is ZERO evidence showing that is necessary, or the way it is.


What could create a god? If you're arguing that everything must have a beginning...

The universe is characterized by chaos more than it is by order. Four laws create all order you see in the universe: Electromagnetic forces, the strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, and gravity. All evidence shows these laws have always existed, and account for everything we see to have occurred. There is no divine order. These laws have led to the self organization of matter and energy into what you see.

There is no evidence that a god created these laws. If a god existed, it would exist outside of these laws, and thus breaks the laws itself.

Saying unequivocally that there is a god, and YOU know what he created is self righteous. We can only speak for what we can observe. We have observed the laws of the universe. We have not observed any evidence for a divine creator.

__________________

First, there is no evidence that shows that God did NOT cause the big bang. What caused it you said it, we dont know.
Second, God is a better explanation b/c everything is in motion. You say the big bang caused everything to be in motion. What caused the big bang, the pure energy? But what caused the pure energy to spark? It sparked from nothingness? No, that is illogical. Only nothing can come from nothingness.
Third. Exactly there is only one planet that has life, Earth. Pretty odd.
Fourth. If earth was any closer to the sun, human life would not be possible. And further away, human life would not be possible.

I can give you websites that say your wrong. The theory of evolution is just that, a theory. It calls itself that, because there is no evidence that undoubtedly shows the macro. As i have been taught, by books and not the internet, the fossil records show no evidence of mcroevolution. But all that aside, evolution does not dissprove God. Evolution could be through His divine structure. I just refuse to believe that i am the dissendent of a chimp, or that we share a same dissendent.

The big bang, honestly i'm skeptical but i go with it b/c that's what people are saying, had to ignite from something. You say pure energy, but why could God not be pure energy. That would make since since it would seem that a God could create matter, and you say pure energy could create matter.

Neither side can undoubtedly say the other side id undoubtedly wrong b/c neither side has all the evidence. You even admit this when you say we dont know yet what caused the big bang. You cant prove that god doesn't exsist and i cant prove that god does exsist. All i can do is show you that it is possible and rational to believe in God.

I never claim to know what God has created, because surely he has created that which i do not know of. Surely we can speak of what we cannot observe. I cannot observe the wind, but i know it's there. I know it can knock down buildings, yet i cannot see the wind.

science says nothing about a god. god is a never observed creature that fills the voights that humanity creates with its questions on its own existence. Purpose is given by man, but that does not make purpose in nature a fact. it is just to challenging for some to accept that purpose might not exist and is merely a product of our minds.

There is also no evidence that I did not create the big bang. The argument is moot.

You're arguing that a god came from nothingness.

Energy by definition is the power to change things. Something doesn't need to act on the energy for it to do work. Do not think of the energy as a molecule of gasoline, that need be lit to release its energy, energy is the result of burning gasoline, not the gasoline itself. Energy is inherently in motion, it is not set in motion by something else.

The theory states that at the beginning it was very dense, very hot, and had very high pressures, and then it expanded at an instant. The Big Bang is the rapid expansion. Like a Supernova of massive proportions, when the density caused by gravity just gets too high, and its blows.


You assume that we are the only life in the universe. This is a flawed assumption. We merely do not know of any other life, that does not mean it does not exist.

There are likely many, many other planets with similar conditions to that of early earth, and could support life in the form that we know it. There is an entire field of science concerned with the origins of life, and how it could arise spontaneously. So far, we know that molecules form spontaneously, and we know that monomers that make up proteins can form spontaneously given the right molecules and an energy source. See the Miller-Urey experiment. Right now the study is on how these monomers could come together to form proteins, and then life. All evidence found so far shows that it is very possible for life to arise spontaneously given the right circumstances.


My sources are the University of Texas at Austin, and The University of California at Berkeley. I would let my sources credibility go against yours any day.

Evolution does show that a god is not necessary for life to arise, that it can occur by natural means. It's your business if you want to ignore the facts, and blindly believe in something that has zero evidence to support its existence. It is still a belief wrought in denial of the rational, and what if thinking.


If a god is the pure energy that begot the big bang, then everything is god. The whole universe is god, and we are part of him. In which case, god would be synonymous with matter the universe and everything in it.


If you take a deistic approach, and give up on the personal god, then I cannot disprove your claims, only show that they are unlikely and irrational. But as long as you hold onto the personal god, it can be disproved by scientific fact which shows that life, the earth, our sun, etc. were all formed by natural processes.


You claimed to know that he is involved in the local affairs of earth, and was directly involved in the creation of man. That he laid a trail of evidence out to show we evolved from apes, but that we didn't really. It's just a god trying to trick us!

__________________

[quote=Caltex;161787]



You have said basically everything but I think I have a little more to add...

We may think that we are special because we are alive and if the Earth was slightly closer to the sun it would be too hot to support water, but the only way that we are able to think about how lucky we are is if all of those criteria were already filled. That means that the arguement about the luck of the life on Earth has no real imperical value because the senario of life can't be compared with a senario of no life.

We may question if there is a god if we were born into a place that couldn't support life, because that would be any normal place in space, but than we wouldn't be able to exist and think about it.

and just to say...
I respect when people choose to have a religion but it doesn't really hold up to an arguement that doesn't involve facts that are from religion, because that is being disputed. You can't evidence if the evidence is the topic that is being discussed.

its funny because if all what you say is true why have great men fallen great kingdoms fallen when they had deny God, you guys seem to forget that science and God go together there is no seperation God is and will always be while everthing else has a death attached to it. A being that created all that we see and you really think that God himself is created??? If you are a scientist then plainly you can see that there is a creating force behind all of this. Even behind the big bang there was a creating force behind it which caused it to happen. Many scientist start off being an atheist then turn around after further studing a reconize that there is a creating force out there which leads them to accept that it is God, but this is the thinking on a high level to not believe in a creting force is low level scientific thinking.

Okay, let's all admit that the Flying Spaghetti Monster created it all.

what are you talking about? kingdoms have fallen regardless of what they thought of god, it has no influence.
God is a concept made by man to fill the gaps and explain us everything. If you are a scientist you will acknowledge that you cant observe and therefore not logically deduce anything like a creating force. that is a matter of believing not science.

I think evolution simply happens. If there is a God is he a God to every other place in the entire universe which goes on for infinity. Or is he just a God for this planet?
Also, it is sheer human arrogance to assume that this is the only planet in the entire universe which sustains life forms

It is stupid to claim that there is no god; it is also equally stupid to claim that their definitely is a god. Neither side has sufficient evidence to back up their argument or disprove the other, so both should shut up and respect each other's beliefs.---Agreed