Are you an atheist? (2 Viewers)

Bladerunner · Apr 18, 2014

Galaxiom said:
Galaxiom said:

It would be because very few serious scientists could be bothered wasting their time watching it and less still critiquing it. Moreover, real science is not published as a movie. If it was serious science it would be published as a peer reviewed paper in a journal.

Click to expand...

First, Hello my old friend:

Then I take it that the Cosmos and other made for TV movies/documentaries are not real science. The faster you travel, the more time slows down (relativity), the closer you get to a black hole the more time slows down and of course the stretching of the space fabric itself does not slow down time. Of course, he who pushed the beginning button was traveling with it all. Why travel at the speed of light when you were already there.

It is clearly aimed at a scientifically illiterate audience with a low threshold of what the consider "proof". People like BladeRunner who have already been convinced that the Bible is infallible.

Click to expand...

From my perspective, it is also clearly aimed at a scientifically literate audience with a high threshold of what would be needed to be considered proof that God created the heavens and the earth in our prospective 13.5 billion years ago in order to convince people like Galaxiom who have already been convinced that the Bible is false and there is no GOD.

In fact the shorter time period to dilate (13.5 billion years) will only play a little closer to the Bible. You seem to miss that we are talking about Genesis. It and the first five books of the bible were given to Moses some 1400 to 2000 years ago by God himself already written. How could man write it that long ago if their interpretation of their surroundings was that the earth was FLAT! Even in later years, the sun and moon revolved around the earth. I believe if I had to chose who wrote Genesis, it would not be man.

No doubt it uses a fudge I have come across before by assigning a logarithmic scale to time. Then they try to invoke Relativity to justify it. Most people don't understand Relativity but they know Einstein was pretty sharp so it sounds good to involve him.

Click to expand...

From what I can gather from the movie, it uses the speed of light, gravity and of course the effects of stretching the fabric of space.

Oops, run out of time... will refute the other ramblings of this man a little later. LOL.

Have a nice day :>)
Bladerunner

Rabbie · Apr 18, 2014

Bladerunner said:
If it is upheld in the scientific community, really hurts a lot of people. This movie has been out for 2 years.

A big IF.

Bladerunner said:
I am not really smart enough to know if it is good science but it has the feel that it is.

I can offer no more than that.

I think that means it is just a clever spoof

Bladerunner said:
Let me know what you think. Of course, this still does not prove that God exist, it just proves that all things were created in 6 days.The Big Bang just happened and man wrote the bible all by himself. Yes, sir, he wrote the first five books in the bible that align themselves exactly with what this science is showing. Yes sir, sounds good to me.

Have a nice day :>)

Bladerunner

Since Genesis has already been shown to have errors in the time sequence anything that purports to agree with it is clearly bad science. There are two variants of the Creation in Genesis that contradict each other. Which do you consider to be correct?

Why do you think that the Hindus have got it wrong and your religion is right. After all Judaism and Islam say there is only one god while Christianity seems to hedge its bets with the idea of a three-in-one deity.

The Hindus have multiple gods. Who is right? perhaps they are all wrong.

Have a nice day and a pleasant Easter

Bladerunner · Apr 18, 2014

Rabbie said:
Rabbie said:

A big IF.
I think that means it is just a clever spoof

Since Genesis has already been shown to have errors in the time sequence anything that purports to agree with it is clearly bad science. There are two variants of the Creation in Genesis that contradict each other. Which do you consider to be correct?

Click to expand...

Why do you think that the Hindus have got it wrong and your religion is right. After all Judaism and Islam say there is only one god while Christianity seems to hedge its bets with the idea of a three-in-one deity.

The Hindus have multiple gods. Who is right? perhaps they are all wrong.

Click to expand...

Hi Rabbie: I am not sure what variants you speak of. The Hindus have transcendentalism world view in that that mother nature and all her creatures including man are gods unto themselves.

As far as Islam goes it was written about 4-600 years after the birth of Christ. I believe there are three books of Islam each dealing with Muhammad at three different stages of his life. Judaism and Christianity are basically the same a few exceptions. We still agree there is One God, one savior (Jesus Christ his son). They Israel are Gods chosen people from way back, Yes they se things a little different but the creation (1st five books) was given to Moses by God himself. Now, what about the religion of Atheism? I hear nothing from it. I can read nothing about it but it is there?

Rem, even Darwin (which most world views except Theism believe in) could not account for all of the animals suddenly appearing at specific times in history. They did not fit his model.

There are those that believe that everything was created some 6,000 years ago. Obviously as a person of some science, I do not believe that.

Some say that if radiocarbon dating of an object is wrong yet we know how old it is by other means, then the radiocarbon dating of an object for years passed can and probably is wrong. Me, I am in left field on that one and will take the winner. lol.

p.s. if you have not see the movie and the arguments it throws out there, how can you refute it based upon another persons perspective. The day age theory this is may or may not be but it throws a lot of questions out there I have not found to specifically address this theory and do away with it. Is it possible that as theories goes, this one is as viable as the one(s) Atheism holds so dearly. If nothing else , this is a good start.

Have a good a day:>)
Bladerunner

And you "have a nice day and a pleasant Easter" as well.

Galaxiom · Apr 18, 2014

Bladerunner said:
Then I take it that the Cosmos and other made for TV movies/documentaries are not real science.

That is correct. Scientists don't get Nobel prizes for movies. However they are generally based on established science although often simplified for the target audience.

The faster you travel, the more time slows down (relativity), the closer you get to a black hole the more time slows down and of course the stretching of the space fabric itself does not slow down time. Of course, he who pushed the beginning button was traveling with it all. Why travel at the speed of light when you were already there.

The concept is arbitrarily applied to try and make the Genesis story fit the reality. It is one hypothesis. An equally valid hypothesis is that the Bible is the work of man. To separate these hypotheses we need them to predict something that has not yet been established.

The God Time Dilation hypotheses predicts that all time as observed by God should be slowed. As I pointed out previously the time scales observed by God in other parts of the Bible are not affected.

The Bible By Man hypothesis suggests that there will be other errors in the Bible. The creation of the Sun, Moon and stars after the Earth has been populated with fruiting plants establishes this. Bible By Man hypothesis is supported, the God Time Dilation hypothesis is rejected. Case closed.

From my perspective, it is also clearly aimed at a scientifically literate audience with a high threshold of what would be needed to be considered proof that God created the heavens and the earth in our prospective 13.5 billion years ago in order to convince people like Galaxiom who have already been convinced that the Bible is false and there is no GOD.

It fails to meet even a rudimentary threshold. I am convinced the Bible is the work of man because there is evidence to support that position. Although evidence cannot be be provided to disprove the existence of a God, science shows that the Universe can develop from a single pixel of pure energy into what we see today without requiring a god. As such the notion of a god is entirely superfluous.

In fact the shorter time period to dilate (13.5 billion years) will only play a little closer to the Bible. You seem to miss that we are talking about Genesis. It and the first five books of the bible were given to Moses some 1400 to 2000 years ago by God himself already written. How could man write it that long ago if their interpretation of their surroundings was that the earth was FLAT! Even in later years, the sun and moon revolved around the earth. I believe if I had to chose who wrote Genesis, it would not be man.

There is nothing in Genesis that indicates the writer was aware that the Earth was a sphere nor that it revolved around the Sun. Indeed it suggests that the the sky is a dome that separates the waters into the oceans and the water beyond it. Since space is not made of water, once again the Genesis account is shown to be wrong.

Moreover, there is no evidence beyond the Bible that Moses was any more than a character in a work of fiction.

Galaxiom · Apr 18, 2014

Bladerunner said:
As far as Islam goes it was written about 4-600 years after the birth of Christ. I believe there are three books of Islam each dealing with Muhammad at three different stages of his life.

Click to expand...

The three books consist of the wisdom to Mohammed by Allah (The Qu'ran), the sayings of Mohammed, and the things Mohammed did. Scholars of Islam need to work out which bits to follow because Mohammed was one of the greatest hypocrites of all time. Indeed he couldn't even get the stories in the Qu'ran consistent. The number of days for creation vary.

Rem, even Darwin (which most world views except Theism believe in) could not account for all of the animals suddenly appearing at specific times in history. They did not fit his model.

Click to expand...

Darwin is not the last word on Evolution any more than Newton was the last word on Gravity. The "explosions" of diversity in the fossil record have since been provided with explanations. They occur when crucial developments arise. For example the integration of the organisms that became mitochondria into larger single cellular organisms facilitated multicellular life forms which led to the "Cambrian Explosion".

Some say that if radiocarbon dating of an object is wrong yet we know how old it is by other means, then the radiocarbon dating of an object for years passed can and probably is wrong. Me, I am in left field on that one and will take the winner. lol.

Click to expand...

The doubters of Evolution love to poke at Radiocarbon Dating and imply that it comes up with wrong answers. In fact RCD is pretty much irrelevant to the dating of the steps in evolution since it only covers a time scale of about 30K years. There are myriad other techniques used to date ancient events. They are consistent.

p.s. if you have not see the movie and the arguments it throws out there, how can you refute it based upon another persons perspective. The day age theory this is may or may not be but it throws a lot of questions out there I have not found to specifically address this theory and do away with it. Is it possible that as theories goes, this one is as viable as the one(s) Atheism holds so dearly. If nothing else , this is a good start.

Click to expand...

It doesn't raise any new questions. It is simply yet another attempt to justify the anachronism of faith in a world where science has become the most powerful tool we have ever had while faith has brought only ignorance.

Bladerunner · Apr 20, 2014

Galaxiom said:
Galaxiom said:

I have read a review of the movie that covers the use of Relativitistic Time dilation to show that what appeared as 14 billion years from Earth's accelerated perspective would have only been six days from God's perspective.

The problem there is the logic is reversed. God would need to be the one travelling close to the speed of light. As I said earlier, most people don't really understand Relativity.

It also neglects to mention that God said the Hebrews wandered in the desert for forty years and that several people lived for many hundreds of years. Why didn't God perceive these intervals as femtoseconds?

Click to expand...

Glaxiom: This quote is the first on page 261. Who would have thunk it. lol.

I would like to respond to your other post on this page but it will have to wait until after Easter Sunday.

I would like to take issue with the relativity guru. OK, If you travel to a distant star at the speed of light and return, time was slowed down for you (you aged only a little) and the earth aged thousands of years. NO!?????

You said, God had to be traveling at the speed of light for it to affect him. but what he saw was the big bang traveling at light speed away from him. His perspective. Therefore millions of miles later The First day was done.But to God the 670 million miles would have happened in the first twenty four hours. millions of miles happened Yes, the earth was formed that day. It just was not at the place in space it is now. Is this possible. Yes, No

Of course the earth was traveling at that speed so time also was slowed down.

OK, Gravity: I will paraphrase the movie a little here. bare with me. I just want to know.

A space ship from a distance studies a black hole. Now we all know what a black hole is. It has gravity off of any scale you can set up. To get a closer look at the black hole, the main ship sends a smaller ship to map out the BH. Now it take about 10 hours to get where they are going, and about an hour to map it out and 10 hours back. (21 hours). They return to the mother ship only to find it gone and another newer ship that has replaced it. They find out that it has been 1000 years since they left the ship because of the effect of the black holes gravity on time. From the small ships perspective it had only been 21 hours and from the mother ships perspective it has been over 1000 years. So it is with God and Genesis.

Another:

The Big Bang started from something akin to a black hole, something that was so dense, that light itself, nothing could escape its grasp. The big bang did not start with a light show because light could not escape. If you were sitting on top of the big bang when it went off and your day was well (we will use 24 hours), how far would the planets, debris, radiation, etc travel going at near if not the speed of light. So God was setting there when it went off so his perspective was much like the small space ship. Once he started dealing with man were here on earth, time was the same as we have now. Where am I wrong here.

Stretching of space slows time::: Yes, No Blow up a balloon, it takes only a few seconds to put some air into it but as it gets bigger, it takes more air thus takes longer to inflate. I guess the universe looks like that balloon and the bigger it gets, the longer it takes to get there (time slows down).

Measurement of time is the speed of light. It is a constant.

Anyways, Hope you have a nice Easter holiday my friend and I will not hold it against you because you do not believe.

Have a NICE Easter Holiday to all :>)
Bladerunner

Rabbie · Apr 20, 2014

Bladerunner said:
Hi Rabbie: I am not sure what variants you speak of.
Have a good a day:>)
Bladerunner

And you "have a nice day and a pleasant Easter" as well.

Click to expand...

The variants I am referring to are

Genesis 1:27 [FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_]

So God created man in his
[/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT=KinesisMM-It_380_][FONT=KinesisMM-It_380_]own [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_]image, in the image of God created he him ; male and female created he them.[/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_][/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_]and in Genesis 2:5[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_]
and every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew : for the
[/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT=KinesisMM-SC_380_][FONT=KinesisMM-SC_380_]Lord [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_]God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=KinesisMM-It_380_][FONT=KinesisMM-It_380_]there was [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_]not a man to till the ground.[/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_][/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_]Genesis 2:7 [FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_]

And the
[/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT=KinesisMM-SC_380_][FONT=KinesisMM-SC_380_]Lord [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_]God formed man [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=KinesisMM-It_380_][FONT=KinesisMM-It_380_]of [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_]the dust of the ground, and

breathed into his nostrils the breath of life ; and man became a living soul.

Genesis 2:21-22
[FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_]
And the
[/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT=KinesisMM-SC_380_][FONT=KinesisMM-SC_380_]Lord [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_]God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept ; and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof.

And the rib, which the
[/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT=KinesisMM-SC_380_][FONT=KinesisMM-SC_380_]Lord [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_]God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.[/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_][/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=KinesisMM_380_][FONT=KinesisMM_380_]Which version is correct.

[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]

spikepl · Apr 20, 2014

... and god was in a funky mood on the day of creation, because he also gave Adam nipples and navel, and an appendix and a foreskin, for good measure

Vassago · Apr 21, 2014

Hope everyone had an amazing Zombie Jesus Day!

Brianwarnock · Apr 21, 2014

Are we in danger of poking fun at people's sincerely held beliefs instead of entering a meaningful discussion.

Brian

Vassago · Apr 21, 2014

Brianwarnock said:
Are we in danger of poking fun at people's sincerely held beliefs instead of entering a meaningful discussion.

Brian

Hasn't that been done this entire thread?

I thought a little light hearted humor was needed.

Everyone should just not say anything, because someone will always be offended.

Rabbie · Apr 21, 2014

In general I think people have tried to attack the arguments and not the person. A bit of humour is always good.

Galaxiom · Apr 22, 2014

Vassago said:
Hope everyone had an amazing Zombie Jesus Day!

My family and friends celebrate the genuine meaning of Easter. It is an ancient fertility festival that predates the origins of the Jesus myth by millennia.

The name very probably originated from Ishtar and is also connected to terms meaning fertility such as oestrus and its spelling variants.

Ultimately it is undoubtely the celebration of the northern spring equinox marked as the passing of winter from ancient times when mankind first became aware of the astronomical patterns of the Sun's movements and its relationship to the seasons.

The attempt to usurp the festival with the commemoration of the crucifiction of Jesus was introduced much later by Constantine. It never really took over, as along with the name, the fertility symbols of rabbit and eggs still dominate the celebration.

Vassago · Apr 22, 2014

Galaxiom said:
My family and friends celebrate the genuine meaning of Easter. It is an ancient fertility festival that predates the origins of the Jesus myth by millennia.

The name very probably originated from Ishtar and is also connected to terms meaning fertility such as oestrus and its spelling variants.

Ultimately it is undoubtely the celebration of the northern spring equinox marked as the passing of winter from ancient times when mankind first became aware of the astronomical patterns of the Sun's movements and its relationship to the seasons.

The attempt to usurp the festival with the commemoration of the crucifiction of Jesus was introduced much later by Constantine. It never really took over, as along with the name, the fertility symbols of rabbit and eggs still dominate the celebration.

It actually more probably originates from Eostre/Ostara, the Germanic paganism Goddess of fertility, as the earliest mention of Easter originates from present day Germany and surrounding areas. Ishtar never had a hare or egg symbol, whereas Eostre can be connected to both. There are many theories that connect Eostre to both. Eostre was also closely connected and possibly integrated with, the Nordic goddess Freyha, who has ties to the hare.

I've studied many holiday ties and that one always made the most sense to me, since Anglo pagans were integrated into Christian customs.

Ishtar never had a hare or egg symbol, much to the recently forwarded information's inaccuracy.

Galaxiom · Apr 22, 2014

Vassago said:
It actually more probably originates from Eostre/Ostara, the Germanic paganism Goddess of fertility, as the earliest mention of Easter originates from present day Germany and surrounding areas.

I wonder if Eostre is connected to Ishtar in the distant past too and the hare and eggs were added to Eostre or dropped from Ishtar (depending on which way the tradition migrated).

Many of the old traditions including many of the aspects ascribed to Jesus (such as the virgin birth and resurrection) come from much older myths.

Vassago · Apr 22, 2014

Galaxiom said:
I wonder if Eostre is connected to Ishtar in the distant past too and the hare and eggs were added to Eostre or dropped from Ishtar (depending on which way the tradition migrated).

Many of the old traditions including many of the aspects ascribed to Jesus (such as the virgin birth and resurrection) come from much older myths.

Very true. It's fascinating how similar many religious texts and books are, especially considering it's highly likely they are nothing more than evolutions of a predating religion. I think it's obvious that most Christians accept that Easter was not the day Jesus actually came back from the dead any more than the date for Christmas was the day Jesus was born. It's merely the date they choose to celebrate it. They know decorating trees and eggs has nothing to do with their religion. It's a tradition they've accepted. There's nothing wrong with that and in no way makes them stupid. I get sick of people bashing Christians for celebrating a holiday their way, even if some of the traditions belonged to another religion first. Who cares? The way religion evolved back then was to accept, adapt, and evolve traditions from other religions and cultures in order to thrive. This means dropping rules and adjusting others. It's part of why the church no longer uses "obey" in marriage.

This is something the Catholic Church can learn from today. They seem to have forgotten how.

Galaxiom · Apr 22, 2014

I get annoyed when Christians go on about the "true meaning" of Easter.

I have written letters to our local paper a couple of times after they published such stories. It has been several years now and they have not since run any stories about it. I think Christians realise that they undermine their own credibility with such claims.

However I do think it is entirely fair to to point out that the offensive nature of a belief system that claims all are born sinners and only can be "saved" through the brutal murder of an innocent. The tone of their Easter message is extremely negative and yes, their beliefs are irrational and stupid.

amberkei · Apr 23, 2014

There's very little, aside from a few lines from Bede and Grimm, to support Eostre as a historical goddess. That being said, as a Pagan, I celebrate Ostara over Easter.

I've always loved the story of the "Ostara bunny" that was told to me when I was in college (keep in mind that I've never found this mythos outside of my friend's coven, and I've no idea where it originates):

The Goddess had a white dove that was most beloved of all of her birds. When it had an accident and broke its wing, it could no longer fly. Unable to repair the wing, she transformed the dove into a beautiful white hare - who still laid eggs.

Vassago · Apr 23, 2014

amberkei said:
There's very little, aside from a few lines from Bede and Grimm, to support Eostre as a historical goddess. That being said, as a Pagan, I celebrate Ostara over Easter.

Eostre and Ostara are the same goddess...

amberkei · Apr 23, 2014

Vassago said:
Eostre and Ostara are the same goddess...

Yes. I tend to use Eostre as the Goddess name and Ostara for the holiday. *shrug* Just the way I was taught, I suppose.

Are you an atheist? (2 Viewers)

Are you an atheist?

I am 100% atheist, no evidence could convince me there is a god

I am an atheist, but if god appeared before me tomorrow I would change my mind

I am an agnostic, I just don't know!

I am not sure there is a god, but isn't it better to assume there is just in case?

My god is the only god and he definitely exists.

Registered User.

Super Moderator

Registered User.

Super Moderator

Super Moderator

Registered User.

Super Moderator

Eledittingent Beliped

Former Staff Turned AWF Retiree

Retired

Former Staff Turned AWF Retiree

Super Moderator

Super Moderator

Former Staff Turned AWF Retiree

Super Moderator

Former Staff Turned AWF Retiree

Super Moderator

Registered User.

Former Staff Turned AWF Retiree

Registered User.

Users who are viewing this thread