+- Las Venturas Playground (https://forum.sa-mp.nl)
+-- Forum: Miscellaneous (https://forum.sa-mp.nl/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: General Talk (https://forum.sa-mp.nl/forum-24.html)
+--- Thread: [Serious Discussion] Religion (/thread-26936.html)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - 0Target0 - 04-05-2011
(04-05-2011, 11:00 AM)TwistedDemon link Wrote: since the bible is edited, can you post for me which particular verses are edited?
if you can't then how do you still consider it as a holy book and a word of God? and you know that people edited it.
i repeat its an assembly of stories, all of them are edited
He wont reply cause he knows he's wrong.
Also styla i dont really get your point of organised energy, because energy cant be organised since it is not physical.
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - [SAE]Grim - 04-05-2011
(04-05-2011, 11:49 AM)0Target0 link Wrote: Also styla i dont really get your point of organised energy, because energy cant be organised since it is not physical.
Lol, he doesnt even understand half of what he's saying regarding the whole big bang stuff
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - STyL4 - 04-05-2011
actually if its so dumb reply with a conclusion or fed-back, u make a fool out urself with a denial. ^^
"And its really retarded, as I stated before, everytime a discussion gets going the most used questions by religious ppl is the typical questions about big bang." - oh loverboy, what are u doing here then asking about religious stuff and asking same pathetic stuff over and over again, ure not so different after all.
"The human race is an intelligent specie that has evolved alot over time and the biggest thing holding it back is brainwashed religious people that just cant let go of what was necessarry for humans thousands of years ago. It's like if the fuckin apes held evolving apes in cages to prevent evolution" - was that in middle age or in the time of old Christianity? and obviously people were not even dumb in the history, without antique this word would be horrible.
TwistedDemon, I TOLD U WHICH PARTS were edited and why, i guess youre just too stubborn to read it. u obviously dont get it and u make a fool out of urself by asking same thing over and over again. why is it considered as holy book? what about you read my "long post" once again and THEN ask questions, obviously it is called holy for reason as the Holy Spirit was mentioned. it is clear that that part COULD not be edited, and obviously Moses one too
Amazing Revelation! The REAL Bible Code? - Part I (YHWH) Just an assembly of stories, ofcourse. do some studies
AMAZING REVELATION! - Part 2 - The REAL Bible Code? (SATAN)
Amazing Revelation! - Part 3 - The REAL Bible Code (SALVATION)
Amazing Bible Facts! - PART III - You WILL be amazed! Promise!
+1000 more vids of that user, obviously some of them were blocked because atheists did not really like it and decided to make a group to ignore the truth. you dont have to see them all to get the point.
you dont have to watch it all to see that it's not just some fairytale
))"Lol, he doesnt even understand half of what he's saying regarding the whole big bang stuff" - way more than u, all ure doing is saying "because energy cant be organised since it is not physical." - OFCOURSE it cant, but evolution claims it can be
then we've got durrr who's saying : oh those things formed, obviously they did, but they could not form out of nothing, now u'll say :there were chemistrical stuff, ofcourse they didnt form out of nothing! oh wait, now get the thing that complexion of energies THAT WERE after the big bang COULD NOT MAKE ORGANISATION, lets say it was organised(rofl) but it couldnt not make organisation and just GO create specific thing and out of that 100000000000 other things. without the force =)and just a though, Science and Religion are connected.
Incredible Facts of The Bible (HD)
i like this one, gravitation, expanding universe, major natural facts etc.. you can say: yea they predicted that and they were lucky... well first you say they were clearly easy to brainwash, now they could predict like 1000 stuff correct? hm ok.
typed that fast, sry for few mistakezz im in a rush
cyaRe: [Serious Discussion] Religion - durrrrr - 04-05-2011
(04-04-2011, 09:30 PM)STyL4 link Wrote: do some research, energy is eternal unlike amino-acids, energy is a must in evolution and evolution theory relys on law of termodynamics - >energy is eternal< therefore big bang can be formed, but obviously energy had to be organised atleast little, it is simply too logical that from pure minimum energy and few chemical structures you can get to some stage, but not as we ARE now!I think you don't get it. I never said that Universe could have evolved without energy. I just don't see how anything can happen without energy so it's totally no point of you bringing that up. I know that myself.
You don't know about transformation of primitive elements into more complex ones, you don't know that new things can form from the old ones? How can you say so easily without any proofs that we couldn't evolve to the level we are now?
Quote:you dont know shit, you dont even know about Weyer's experiment, and u think u know what evolution theory is talking about! LOL!I'm not talking about Weyer's experiment or whatever, I'm talking about Darwin's theory of evolution and I suggest you to stick to the topic of our argument.
Quote:if they would adapt to the first after big bang condition as the evolution theory would say, galaxy wouldnt be so abstract, smarty.I don't think you know the meaning of the word 'abstract' well enough.
Right after the Big Bang there were no good conditions for the life to form (at least no conditions for the life we know to form). So nothing we know now could have formed right after the Big Bang. Nothing we know could adapt to billions of degrees in temperature, to the enormous density and zero visibility.
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - Anna_ - 04-05-2011
being without a religion is soo fair
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - STyL4 - 04-05-2011
indeed concentration of energy was needed, but where did this come from? if it isnt so not organised afterall.
they say it came from quantum mechanical fluctuationwithin a vacuum but no vacuum existed before the Big Bang. everything is based on preexisting matter or energy, EVERYTHING. what made the big bang be the big bang? the mass concentration just proposed in this theory would rly remain forever bound as a universal black hole and the gravity itself is the problem, it would prevent it from expanding outward.
and what is the natural way for formations of planets,stars,galaxies? if there was explosion it should produce outward sprays of gas and radiations etc. and the gas would be expanding and not form planets,stars,entire galaxies.
big bang relies(some versions of big bang) the equal production of matter and antimater, but e.g in spaces u find only small traces of antimatter positrons and antiprotons...........
there is still no 100% proof about universe's age and some of the experiments relys on that, that the universe is too young for all the evolution theories
QUOTING NEXT(its hard to example,but it is indeed interesting, specially the density,distribution of the mass itself.
)"Missing Mass: Many scientists assume that the universe will eventually stop expanding and begin to collapse inward. Then it will again explode and repeat its oscillating type of perpetual motion. This idea is an effort to avoid an origin and destiny for the universe. For oscillation to occur, however, the universe must have a certain density or distribution of mass. Space Exploration. Illustration copyrighted.So far, measurements of the mass density are 100 times smaller than expected. In fact there are indications that the universe is accelerating outward instead of slowing down. The universe does not appear to be oscillating. The necessary mass or “dark matter” is “missing.” "
u mentioned the formations etc. etc... what about formations around the galaxy? universe was evolving, u even mentioned the time and evolution with it, the universe should be filled with radio singlas from intelligent life forms =OOOO
what about neutrinos, because they should flood the earth because of the sun's fusion, there are so small, so "not real" science should not speak about originality at all there......
predictions in the Bible atleast werent wrong about universe : O
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - durrrrr - 04-05-2011
Quote:indeed concentration of energy was needed, but where did this come from? if it isnt so not organised afterall. they say it came from quantum mechanical fluctuationwithin a vacuum but no vacuum existed before the Big Bang. everything is based on preexisting matter or energy, EVERYTHING.
"It came from quantum mechanical fluctuation within a vacuum". I don't know where did you hear that energy came from there. Nobody knows where did the Big Bang come from. And quantum fluctuations don't explain where did the energy come from. Because of the quantum fluctuations, you can say in simple words, that no matter how stable and not moving you keep the particle, it is still moving just a little because of the uncertainty principle, and since it moves, it has some energy.
It's not that quantum fluctuations gave the whole energy to the Universe.
Quote:what made the big bang be the big bang? the mass concentration just proposed in this theory would rly remain forever bound as a universal black hole and the gravity itself is the problem, it would prevent it from expanding outward.Universe isn't in a zone, where the gravity keeps the whole thing from expanding. Hence, it's already proven that Universe is expanding, so that means that at the very moment of the Big Bang Universe was at the point, where gravity wasn't strong enough to keep the things in one point.
Quote:and what is the natural way for formations of planets,stars,galaxies? if there was explosion it should produce outward sprays of gas and radiations etc. and the gas would be expanding and not form planets,stars,entire galaxies.Not the gas is expanding, but the whole velocity of Universe is rising. We are not expanding, Earth is not expanding, gases are not expanding. I don't really know if this is right here, but the dark matter might be expanding (the matter that is between the galaxies, stars, etc.). Imagine a pie with raisins - if you expand the pie (dark matter), raisins (known normal matter) don't necessarily expand.
Quote:big bang relies(some versions of big bang) the equal production of matter and antimater, but e.g in spaces u find only small traces of antimatter positrons and antiprotons...........No, the amount of anti-mater isn't equal to the amount of matter. You probably mixed that with the total amount of positively charged particles and negatively charged particles, which, in the sum, make the charge of 0.
And if we can't find something, that doesn't mean that doesn't exist (for example, dark matter, dark energy).
Quote:there is still no 100% proof about universe's age and some of the experiments relys on that, that the universe is too young for all the evolution theoriesThere won't be 100% proof (not crossing the Sci-Fi boundaries). But according to Hubble's Law, which is quite accurate, we know approximately the age of the Universe.
Quote:QUOTING NEXT(its hard to example,but it is indeed interesting, specially the density,distribution of the mass itself. )I don't see anything new here. We know that Universe is expanding with an acceleration.
"Missing Mass: Many scientists assume that the universe will eventually stop expanding and begin to collapse inward. Then it will again explode and repeat its oscillating type of perpetual motion. This idea is an effort to avoid an origin and destiny for the universe. For oscillation to occur, however, the universe must have a certain density or distribution of mass. Space Exploration. Illustration copyrighted.So far, measurements of the mass density are 100 times smaller than expected. In fact there are indications that the universe is accelerating outward instead of slowing down. The universe does not appear to be oscillating. The necessary mass or “dark matter” is “missing.” "
Quote:u mentioned the formations etc. etc... what about formations around the galaxy? universe was evolving, u even mentioned the time and evolution with it, the universe should be filled with radio singlas from intelligent life forms =OOOOUseless discussion here. We don't know what kind of forms could evolve, smarter or not, what they could have found (maybe they don't even know what is a radio signal). And the distances in the Universe are so damn big, that it would take thousands, millions, billions of years for the signals to reach us from some galaxies.
Quote:what about neutrinos, because they should flood the earth because of the sun's fusion, there are so small, so "not real" science should not speak about originality at all there......Well, what about neutrinos? I don't see your question there. Yes, they are small and they are already discovered.
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - STyL4 - 04-05-2011
"Nobody knows where did the Big Bang come from. "
exactly, thank you. that makes the theory even more doubtful.
"Universe isn't in a zone, where the gravity keeps the whole thing from expanding. Hence, it's already proven that Universe is expanding, so that means that at the very moment of the Big Bang Universe was at the point, where gravity wasn't strong enough to keep the things in one point."
An allowance for the expansion of the gaseous component of the Galaxy significantly alters the form of the differential rotation curve derived from observations of the 21-cm hydrogen radio line. A corrected rotation curve is given. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1979PAZh....5..124K
"No, the amount of anti-mater isn't equal to the amount of matter. You probably mixed that with the total amount of positively charged particles and negatively charged particles, which, in the sum, make the charge of 0.
And if we can't find something, that doesn't mean that doesn't exist (for example, dark matter, dark energy)."
i said just some versions, mkay? and even those that do not require that are either doubtful.
"I don't see anything new here. We know that Universe is expanding with an acceleration." read it all
"Useless discussion here. We don't know what kind of forms could evolve, smarter or not, what they could have found (maybe they don't even know what is a radio signal). And the distances in the Universe are so damn big, that it would take thousands, millions, billions of years for the signals to reach us from some galaxies."
maybe useless maybe not, but it would be the proof that would make the small chances of happening in Big Bang higher xD
"Well, what about neutrinos? I don't see your question there. Yes, they are small and they are already discovered."
they should flood the earth from the sun’s fusion process = doubts about sun's energy source and it just shows how much we REALLY understand universe and it's creation, just a though.
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - durrrrr - 04-05-2011
Quote:Universe was at the point, where gravity wasn't strong enough to keep the things in one point."
http://tlc.howstuffworks.com/family/sunshine-activities5.htm
I don't see how your link denies/proves what I've said. It's just an experiment of gas expansion. How can you even parallel those things? In fact, you don't even need to prove/deny anything. If Universe's gravity would be able to keep the things in one point, we wouldn't be here. There would be no Big Bang.
Quote:"I don't see anything new here. We know that Universe is expanding with an acceleration." read it allOh. Well it is the same as the theory of Big Crunch + the theory of Big Bounce. Nothing new, just theories.
Quote:maybe useless maybe not, but it would be the proof that would make the small chances of happening in Big Bang higher xDIt would prove that other life exists (though it would be stupid to think that it doesn't exist even now). It wouldn't raise the chance of the Big Bang or lower it. Of course, if we could communicate with them, we could ask them about their opinion of the Big Bang.
Quote:they should flood the earth from the sun’s fusion process = doubts about sun's energy source and it just shows how much we REALLY understand universe and it's creation, just a though.I don't really know the intensity of the neutrinos coming to us (if it's one particle time to time, or is it like a shower of neutrinos).
Anyways, if it's one or another, it doesn't have that much of an effect on us, so who cares.
Talking about the Sun as the source of energy, we don't know how to use neutrinos as a power source, but we know how to use photons. The key ingredient of sun batteries is a photon, which knocks an electron from the material.
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - STyL4 - 04-05-2011
edited the link, wrong link was dealing with Chemistry project , lmao!
"Oh. Well it is the same as the theory of Big Crunch + the theory of Big Bounce. Nothing new, just theories." and Big Bang
"It would prove that other life exists (though it would be stupid to think that it doesn't exist even now). It wouldn't raise the chance of the Big Bang or lower it. Of course, if we could communicate with them, we could ask them about their opinion of the Big Bang." - it would lower the doubts because already the chances are so low, but adding the life all over the galaxy would just prove formations around the galaxy, that Big Bang Theory is saying.
"I don't really know the intensity of the neutrinos coming to us (if it's one particle time to time, or is it like a shower of neutrinos).
Anyways, if it's one or another, it doesn't have that much of an effect on us, so who cares.
Talking about the Sun as the source of energy, we don't know how to use neutrinos as a power source, but we know how to use photons. The key ingredient of sun batteries is a photon, which knocks an electron from the material." - just saying how much we truly know about Universe, therefore we cant really predict much about it, its magnificent and maybe too magnificent for small humans like me if yer know what i mean
