Does God exist? (4 Viewers)

[Rafy]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Crunch

 

[sam04u]

Dude, our universe is governed by certain laws, even if all the matter in the Universe seemed to dissapear the energy would remain.

Even if there was nothing, there would be laws, you see? These laws exist which mean that there will always be 'Energy', and a 'finite' ammount.
The Universe could never end. (because of the laws).

 

[sam04u]

Rafy, once the laws of the 'Universe' are defined the matter which the universe consists of have no bearing. Even if all the matter did, come together because of a gravatational force, the matter would be under the same pressures they were when the universe first expanded. It would also required the 'gravitational pull' to exceed the threshold 'resistance' of the expanding matter. (which could only occur with the oscillations of gravity stocks to exceed the speed of light. )

 

[sam04u]

Then those laws contradict known science, prove them and win yourself a Nobel Prize.

They don't contradict know science, they're commonly known. Science contradicts the Laws.

I also would rather the war in Lebanon to end and Lebanon be fully restored then 1million Nobel Prize's, It's worth nothing to me.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

I posted Sam's theory here: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=61328

Reply so far;

You could say,

"You're wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. W. Wrongy Wrongenstein. Everything you have said, from the first sentence to the last, is wrong. Your description has sucked some the Right out of the universe. You should be ashamed of yourself for being so wrong. In fact, you should never ever speak again, because whatever you say will probably be wrong, and you've used up your Wrong quota for the year.

How do I know? A physicist told me so, and he's smarter than you, plus he knows what he's talking about. But he was too tired to explain why."

lol.

 

[sam04u]

Who gave you permission to publish my theory on the internet? Especially on a fucken international forum? "It's wrong because a physicist sais so, but I can't prove it."?? WTF is that shit? And What relelvance is my religion???

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Who gave you permission to publish my theory on the internet? Especially on a fucken international forum? "It's wrong because a physicist sais so, but I can't prove it."?? WTF is that shit? And What relelvance is my religion???

You already published your theory on a public internet forum, I can post it where ever I want - I haven't claimed it as my own. There are alot of people on that forum whom know alot about physics, I'm helping you by showing it to them for a more thorough analysis. It seems they might think it a little too kooky to comment, but if you want I'm sure your own postings in that thread (if you sign up to the forum) would really help. I don't have a thorough knowledge of the subject and I doubt anyone else on this forum does either, since you claim to I figure it best present your idea before people with more knowledge than I.

BTW Sam, I think you may have NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder), you believe you've definitively proven the existance of God, are constantly calling people inferior to you intellectually, claim to have come up with a 100% effective way to cure cancer...

I wonder what a psychiatrist would say if you told them all of that? This isn't a cheap poke, I really do think you could have some issues worth going over.

 

[sam04u]

When did I claim that I can prove god exists? I always 'repeated' that It was a theory in case I made it unclear in my statements. I never said that I had proved God's existance I just want you to get that clear. As to whether I have Narcissistic Personality Disorder? Well, I might but that doesn't change the fact that you can't disupute the theories which I have made. Also, the idea of curing cancer is theoretically 100% effective, but as I said it's costly and difficult (time consuming.) It's just a pretty simplistic set of procedures which I came up with (by using my time and thinking), It wasn't like I scribbled it on a piece of paper and screamed 'OMG, COMMENSURATE ME ON FINDING THE SOLUTIONS TO ALL UR PROBLEMS'. It can be proven wrong but then again, it could be right. (right?)

 

[Not-That-Bright]

When did I claim that I can prove god exists? I always 'repeated' that It was a theory in case I made it unclear in my statements. I never said that I had proved God's existance I just want you to get that clear.

To claim you have a solid scientific theory for the existance of God is just as bad.

Well, I might but that doesn't change the fact that you can't disupute the theories which I have made.

Actually I can. What 'Laws' are you even talking about? You've made them all up off of no evidence as far as I can tell, they're not 'universally accepted laws' and if they are please give me a wikipedia article on them.

Or this for example:

So, there would be Energy but it would not be the Energy whcih we know today, which is governed by thermodynamics, it would exist as a type of Force. However, this energy would have needed to sustain itself as it would be under pressure as a whole.

Surely this pressure is obeying some sort of 'law' ? How is it possible that this energy has laws applied to it that haven't yet come into existance.

Also, the idea of curing cancer is theoretically 100% effective, but as I said it's costly and difficult (time consuming.) It's just a pretty simplistic set of procedures which I came up with (by using my time and thinking), It wasn't like I scribbled it on a piece of paper and screamed 'OMG, COMMENSURATE ME ON FINDING THE SOLUTIONS TO ALL UR PROBLEMS'. It can be proven wrong but then again, it could be right. (right?)

Errr... I think it's kinda insane to imagine you've come up with a 100% effective solution to cancer, even if it is a costly/difficult one that required you to use alot of time/thought power. We've got 1000's of scientists all around the world working on cures for different cancers, and you're seriously claiming you have one?

 

[sam04u]

They aren't laws which have been proven or theoreticised before, Just laws which govern the Universe. (In my opinion.) Remember, this is just a theory however, it is more plausible then the concept of the Big Bang theory which presumes that all the laws which govern the universe, along with matter existed prior to the 'Big Bang', which is a flawed statement.

I'll do a quick run-down.

1. Law of Energy - Energy Exists, It is a Finite ammount.
2. Law of Matter - Energy could not simply exist as energy as the space would cause it to diffuse into concentrations of higher and lower energy which would cause and entropy-effect where the energy would need to hold a physical state in order to not be stressed or seperated. The Law of matter was made because of the stressing and seperation of energy, the energy would then exist as particles. (Hence the 2nd law, which is the Law of Matter. )

The rest is pretty self explanatory. If you have the correct understanding of Physics.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

2. Law of Matter - Energy could not simply exist as energy as the space would cause it to diffuse into concentrations of higher and lower energy which would cause and entropy-effect where the energy would need to hold a physical state in order to not be stressed or seperated. The Law of matter was made because of the stressing and seperation of energy, the energy would then exist as particles. (Hence the 2nd law, which is the Law of Matter. )

Why would it cause it to 'diffuse into concentrations of higher and lower energy and cause an entropy effect'.... Your first claim was that there was ONE law to start off, that there is energy in a finite amount. There are no other laws so I don't understand what is effecting it. I.e. what made it 'stress and separate' ?

Also, what do you mean by 'particles' do you perhaps mean photons?

 

[sam04u]

a) It's energy it's not matter there would be no force behind the diffusion besides causing a balance and the energys charge would cause it to react that way. (I'll explain later)

b) Yes, and no. (the photons are the smalls particles of energy released in the clashs which I talked about.)

I need to log-off for a bit, but I'll make quick posts If I get a chance to. ( I have legal studies shit due. )

 

[Not-That-Bright]

They aren't laws which have been proven or theoreticised before, Just laws which govern the Universe. (In my opinion.)

There's also a problem here. We already have laws which have been proven that govern the universe.

I need to log-off for a bit, but I'll make quick posts If I get a chance to. ( I have legal studies shit due. )

Good idea, me too.

 

[*Ninny-mole*]

But, oh wait I forgot, you religiousless racist, atheist, religions (bashing) scum don't hold those beliefs about Islamic people right? According to you we're the center of all terrorism.

Piss off. How dare you accuse people of being racist just because they don't follow your religion, or have similar beliefs to you.
I do not believe in Islam, nor do I believe in Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, or Christianity -> and I was baptised a Catholic, go to a Catholic highschool, used to attend mass every week and have religious relatives. But that doesn't mean that I, and other "religiousless" people don't respect your religion. Just as you think that everyone stereotypes Muslims as being terrorists, you are stereotyping all non-religious people as racist "religions bashing scum". Get over yourself. As you get older, hoepfully you will realise that people hate others for who they are, not what they are. You will come to understand that people don't hate you for being a Muslim, they will hate you for being an arrogant asshole.
BTW, my career aim is to help change the misconceptions about the minority groups in society, such as Aboriginals and migrants - AND MUSILMS. So don't just assume that we are all racist or against you.

 

[c_james]

You really are an idiot, I don't think you would qualify to teach children. (They don't allow racist, xenophobes who aren't open to criticism to teach young children) I think I've explained how you're racist based on your double standards and I wont bother re-discussing it with you.

Errr...no, you haven't proven any "double standard". Refer to my earlier post in which I explained that my avatar is a joke, not a glorification of Che Guevara. You won't bother "re-dicussing" it with me because I definitively shut you up in that last post.

I don't think you understand what this topic is about, it's about the question 'does god exist?', not 'what is god?', I don't expect you to know the difference though, even though they're completely different questions. I'm sure you would like to believe that it was a natural event? that you can't explain? I bet your ideas are supposed to be more plausible then mine? Explain the laws which exist in the universe, the ideas of negatives and positives and everythign you understand? I'm sure the universe pre-existed with all those laws, and it als has a built-in soup which explodes to make procarions and other matter to form hydrogen right? It's all natural right? Imbecile.

You cannot prove something exists if you don't have a conception of what that something is. Everyone in this thread agrees on that point besides you. if you don't have a set, agreed upon definition of something, you can't possibly hope to discuss it intelligently, or prove its existence. Every philosopher who studies metaphysics agrees on that fundamental point, hence the tri-omni God definition.

As for the allegation of xenophobia - I'm not an Anglo-Saxon, and both my parents are migrants. I accept people of all backgrounds, but I do have a problem with the stupid. You fall into that group.

In summary, you are the most ignorant person in this thread. It's people like you, who are so sure of yourselves, yet obviously know nothing, that edge me ever closer to full-blown atheism. Meanwhile all the intelligent people out there, namely almost every agnostic/atheist in this thread, keep open minds, never quite sure of what to believe. And that's why they're better than you and your lameass, wannabe "scientific theories".

EDIT: Not that I have a problem with Anglo-Saxons or anything. It's just that I think sam04u has me pegged as some upper-class white boy whose parents supported the White Australia Policy.

 

[SkyScout]

Why question God's existence when you are unable to comprehend His/Her teachings if you ever did discover God.

There is no point discussing such matter until and unless you have that desire within to discover God.

 

[ur_inner_child]

Why question God's existence when you are unable to comprehend His/Her teachings if you ever did discover God.

There is no point discussing such matter until and unless you have that desire within to discover God.

That's like you telling me why question Santa Claus when I was a child if I never went and explored the North Pole.

Besides, I think a true and intelligent Christian/religious person must at some stage question what he or she believes in to reaffirm or strengthen their faith, rather than blindly accept everything handed to them.

So I don't see why discussing it has no point, whether for or against the idea of God.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Why question God's existence when you are unable to comprehend His/Her teachings if you ever did discover God.

Well because God might not even be there. If God actually is there, then I'll try to comprehend his/her teachings (which you magically claim no one can).

There is no point discussing such matter until and unless you have that desire within to discover God.

I have the desire within to discover God, but even if I didn't I don't see how that would matter much?

I think you should watch/read 'Kissing hank's ass', you might gain some insight into your own thinking.

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDp7pkEcJVQ
Text: http://www.jhuger.com/pamphlets/kha.pdf

 

[SkyScout]

Perhaps you can't comprehend God's words and teachings with your current state of mind...

I'm not saying that I'm perfect. All I'm saying is that it doesn't mean we can't see it it doesnt exist. It's like energy... Can you see energy? No but you can see its effect. In the same way Human Eyes are not meant to Witness God Himself/Herself rather Their doings and works through different people are souls all around the globe.

Go to sahajayoga.org and try the Self-Realisation Process there. Perhaps you might gain an insight there as well. And I will surely visit your link to see what it has to offer.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Perhaps you can't comprehend God's words and teachings with your current state of mind...

Perhaps so but I don't see how I need to comprehend his words/teachings to believe he exists. I may not be able to comprehend the words/teachings of voltaire but i'm pretty sure he existed.

. All I'm saying is that it doesn't mean we can't see it it doesnt exist.

Of course not, but why would you believe in something you have no evidence for?

It's like energy... Can you see energy?

No but I can measure it.

No but you can see its effect.

How can you measure/see the effect of a supernatural being on the universe? If you have a way of doing so, please explain.

In the same way Human Eyes are not meant to Witness God Himself/Herself rather Their doings and works through different people are souls all around the globe.

It's not falsifiable. You say god exists because we can see his influence on the world/through souls.... ooook, how exactly do I falsify that? Replace the word god with 'devil' then tell me why that doesn't work just as well. Any supernatural explanation works as well as 'god'.

sahajayoga.org ? K I'll bite.

Sigh... yoga with arbitrary mystical explanations for stuffs? Awesome.