Does god exist?

[hoss 5,000+ posts]

if he did he wouldnt have done that to the forum.

 

[systemJLx 10+ year member]

Your comprehension skills FTL. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

huh? sorry only got a few hours of sleep last night. had a huge lab to type up. was that confusing? sorry if it was im so tired

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

Your comprehension skills FTL. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/uhoh.gif.c07307dd22ee7e63e22fc8e9c614d1fd.gif

huh? sorry only got a few hours of sleep last night. had a huge lab to type up. was that confusing? sorry if it was im so tired

I think he was laughing because you didn't understand what you were responding to.

Reread what i said.

 

[iagrdshaka 5,000+ posts]

It might be true that the conditions required for the universe as we know it require a series of highly unlikely possibilities, and that the probability of all these things coming together perfectly to form our universe is extremely small. However, I fail to see why chance, or some presently unknown explanation, is somehow absurd and the existence of a hidden, purposive, secretive, and intelligent designer is acceptable. Putting aside the possibility of some presently unknown mechanism, I do not have difficulty believing that the universe as we know it could have been the result of chance alone; the fact that I am here negates that being impossible as much as it proves the existence of an intelligent designer.
Given only two options, seemingly impossible odds or the existence of an intelligent designer, the latter would be the clear choice. But when we allow for a third option and return to the previously set aside idea that the universe can be explained by some presently unknown mechanism or force, the fine tuning argument loses its appeal. It would seem to me, that the probability of us not gaining more knowledge on the subject is somewhere near the probability of all the requirements for life and our universe being fulfilled by chance alone. Perhaps this knowledge that we are likely to acquire in the future will substantiate the claims made by proponents of the fine tuning argument, it is also possible that new knowledge will refute these claims.

Impressive work.

C-

 

[systemJLx 10+ year member]

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/uhoh.gif.c07307dd22ee7e63e22fc8e9c614d1fd.gif


I think he was laughing because you didn't understand what you were responding to.

Reread what i said.

i honestly didnt read what you said. i skimmed a sentence or two that went with what i was saying. lol. sorry it was long and i thought i could cheat the system //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crap.gif.7f4dd41e3e9b23fbd170a1ee6f65cecc.gif my bad.. i dont have bad comprehension skills tho. i passed my FCAT.. lol //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[adio 5,000+ posts]

A god? I don't know. I believe someone or something did place a single cell organism on this planet though, accidently or on purpose.

pretty good answer man

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

Impressive work.
C-

screw you, i got an A.

 

[iagrdshaka 5,000+ posts]

screw you, i got an A.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

 

[AllStar1500bd 5,000+ posts]

No thanks. My bait has to be fresh. I don't eat old, moldy, overused bait.

FAIL.

It might be true that the conditions required for the universe as we know it require a series of highly unlikely possibilities, and that the probability of all these things coming together perfectly to form our universe is extremely small. However, I fail to see why chance, or some presently unknown explanation, is somehow absurd and the existence of a hidden, purposive, secretive, and intelligent designer is acceptable. Putting aside the possibility of some presently unknown mechanism, I do not have difficulty believing that the universe as we know it could have been the result of chance alone; the fact that I am here negates that being impossible as much as it proves the existence of an intelligent designer.
Given only two options, seemingly impossible odds or the existence of an intelligent designer, the latter would be the clear choice. But when we allow for a third option and return to the previously set aside idea that the universe can be explained by some presently unknown mechanism or force, the fine tuning argument loses its appeal. It would seem to me, that the probability of us not gaining more knowledge on the subject is somewhere near the probability of all the requirements for life and our universe being fulfilled by chance alone. Perhaps this knowledge that we are likely to acquire in the future will substantiate the claims made by proponents of the fine tuning argument, it is also possible that new knowledge will refute these claims.

Holy shit, an intelligent answer.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif i took a philo of religion class and that was an answer to one my midterm/final short answer questions //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif

I like it //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif

 

[AllStar1500bd 5,000+ posts]

ya i agree with faulton. there's no way that everything in the universe could fall into place by chance. i mean, just look at how blood clots. that is such a complicated process that theres no way that could have happened by chance.

I can tell you the mechanism on how blood clots, and I bet any physiology/biochem professor could do it better and show you step by step how this is physiologically. If you said anything about god to any life science professor they would laugh at you. They know better.
Evolution = what explains most about physiological processes.

And scientists can date the start of the universe @ 4.7 billion yrs (if i remember correctly from bio)... and I believe the theory is that organic molecules came together that long ago to form "stuff". This has been proven by a scientist in the early 1900s who did an experiment with spontaneously combining organic molecules in a lab environment... so there's a stale argument there.

And I can wiki all this info and cut and paste if you'd like... but I'm sure you can look it up on your own. I don't recall the name of the experiment or the scientist or the exact date off the top of my head.

 

[AJ²06 5,000+ posts]

(1) God is three.

(2) Three's a crowd.

(3) A crowd consists of people.

(4) People exist.

(5) Therefore, God exists.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

(1) God is three.(2) Three's a crowd.

(3) A crowd consists of people.

(4) People exist.

(5) Therefore, God exists.

i disagree with 1, 2, and 5

God is infinity

Three's company

Therefore Jack Tripper exists.

 

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

I pissed in the coffee pot this AM.

 

[iagrdshaka 5,000+ posts]

I pissed in the coffee pot this AM.

I wondered why it tasted so awful today. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/frown.gif.a3531fa0534503350665a1e957861287.gif

 

[bizflawless 5,000+ posts]

We talked about this all this week in my philosophy class.
Does god exist?

Use intelligent reasoning and logic to base your assumption!

yes, [/thread]