Atheists want multiple universes and extra-terrestrial civilizations to exist because they think it will hurt Christianity

[danielpalos]

The most magical, convenient, lower brain satisfying, cheap explanation simply must be the right one. Goddidit! Thank's Occam's Razor

God doesn't take billions of years which no scientific method can verify. Instead, science verifies creationism such as the chicken before the egg and fine tuning facts. Moreover, nobody can answer my question about what was there before the big bang and what did it expand into? The creationists also provided the KCA while atheists have nothing. From Genesis, we know God created space, energy (light), heavens, and Earth first and the set time off later.

Thus, it's the atheist and their scientists who depend on quantum particles (which require space) or some magic that violates the laws of physics such as cosmic inflation.

Some geologists claim the surface (crust) of the Earth could be "recycled" in around five hundred million years; it is one reason why we may not be able to find prehistoric civilizations that may have existed on Earth.

 

[ReinyDays]

You are so wrong. Let's review.

"The Creation of the World

1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day."

For the dark sky and Earth, one needs to have space. He created the EMS (energy) for the universe. This implies he created atoms. I didn't even mention temperature and the rest, but we have to look at the rest to see what was created the first day. People generally do not know about atoms, force, chirality, etc., so we have to figure out what else was created for the first day. He used visible light to separate the day part and dark part as night. I don't think he started time until he created the day and night and then we have the first day (if you interpret the day as 24-hours).

These are all inferences ... and are only your own interpretations of scripture ... you assume God was imperfect when He caused these passages to be written ... that's an extremely dangerous path you take ... essentially, you're calling God a liar ... why not add Taylor Swift to what God created on the first day? ... or how about evolution? ... if you open the door to imply whatever we want, we'll complete miss what God is instructing us on ... if God wanted us to see ourselves as a collection of atoms, He would have said "you are a collection of atoms" ...

We are our brother's keeper ... attend first to that which is explicit ... you may find we need not imply anything ... that indeed, the Bible was written perfectly ...

 

[ReinyDays]

You had your chances already, but nothing. And why do you direct it to me? Why not someone else?

You're the one claiming these chemical reactions are impossible ... and refuse to listen to anyone who can explain otherwise ... shall we start with methane? ...

 

[ReinyDays]

Some geologists claim the surface (crust) of the Earth could be "recycled" in around five hundred million years; it is one reason why we may not be able to find prehistoric civilizations that may have existed on Earth.

Oceanic crust material is recycled ... continent crust materials are not (generally) ... the Canadian Shield and Western Australia are considered over 4 billion years old ...

 

[danielpalos]

Some geologists claim the surface (crust) of the Earth could be "recycled" in around five hundred million years; it is one reason why we may not be able to find prehistoric civilizations that may have existed on Earth.

Oceanic crust material is recycled ... continent crust materials are not (generally) ... the Canadian Shield and Western Australia are considered over 4 billion years old ...

I agree to disagree. From the literature I have consumed, even the crust is recycled through normal plate tectonics and volcanic activity, along with ice ages and temperate ages.

 

[james bond]

Here's another question. What can we visibly see of quantum mechanics, Darwinism, and ToE? I think we understand the light is a wave and even a light particle acts as a wave until it is observed. But where did the light (energy) come from?

Any given, light emitting body such as stars?

All of it would fall under EMS. Even quantum particles:

"
Subatomic particles are either "elementary", i.e. not made of multiple other particles, or "composite" and made of more than one elementary particle bound together.

The elementary particles of the Standard Model are:[7]

• Six "flavors" of quarks: up, down, strange, charm, bottom, and top;
• Six types of leptons: electron, electron neutrino, muon, muon neutrino, tau, tau neutrino;
• Twelve gauge bosons (force carriers): the photon of electromagnetism, the three W and Z bosons of the weak force, and the eight gluons of the strong force;
• The Higgs boson.

The Standard Model classification of particles
All of these have now been discovered by experiments, with the latest being the top quark (1995), tau neutrino (2000), and Higgs boson (2012).

Various extensions of the Standard Model predict the existence of an elementary graviton particle and many other elementary particles, but none have been discovered as of 2020."

The most magical, convenient, lower brain satisfying, cheap explanation simply must be the right one. Goddidit! Thank's Occam's Razor

God doesn't take billions of years which no scientific method can verify. Instead, science verifies creationism such as the chicken before the egg and fine tuning facts. Moreover, nobody can answer my question about what was there before the big bang and what did it expand into? The creationists also provided the KCA while atheists have nothing. From Genesis, we know God created space, energy (light), heavens, and Earth first and the set time off later.

Thus, it's the atheist and their scientists who depend on quantum particles (which require space) or some magic that violates the laws of physics such as cosmic inflation.

Some geologists claim the surface (crust) of the Earth could be "recycled" in around five hundred million years; it is one reason why we may not be able to find prehistoric civilizations that may have existed on Earth.

I have no idea of what five hundred million years would be like. I would think these geologists are basing their hypotheses on scientific atheism, a religion.

 

[james bond]

You had your chances already, but nothing. And why do you direct it to me? Why not someone else?

You're the one claiming these chemical reactions are impossible ... and refuse to listen to anyone who can explain otherwise ... shall we start with methane? ...

I don't think anyone else here knows what you are talking about. If what you have is true, then you could explain it to anybody, not just me.

I used creation science to explain the truth to everybody here. Thus, what you have is most likely a lie unless you have the scientific method to back it up.

 

[ReinyDays]

I agree to disagree. From the literature I have consumed, even the crust is recycled through normal plate tectonics and volcanic activity, along with ice ages and temperate ages.

It certainly can be ... but generally what geologists are referring to is the process of new oceanic crust being extruded out of mid-ocean ridges and subsumed in subduction zones ... a "conveyor belt" of sorts for the ocean bottom ... the Juan de Fuca plate is an excellent example ... the material arises along the Juan de Fuca ridge off-shore and is then overridden by the North American plate along the Cascadia fault ... pushing the oceanic material back down, and the continental material stays on top ...

Typically, but not always ... although I can't think of an example of continental material subducting, that doesn't mean it's not possible ...

 

[ReinyDays]

I don't think anyone else here knows what you are talking about. If what you have is true, then you could explain it to anybody, not just me.
I used creation science to explain the truth to everybody here. Thus, what you have is most likely a lie unless you have the scientific method to back it up.

Easy peasy ... fill a vessel with pure methane ... wait a year ... there will be ethane in the vessel where there was no ethane before ... do you agree? ...

 

[danielpalos]

I agree to disagree. From the literature I have consumed, even the crust is recycled through normal plate tectonics and volcanic activity, along with ice ages and temperate ages.

It certainly can be ... but generally what geologists are referring to is the process of new oceanic crust being extruded out of mid-ocean ridges and subsumed in subduction zones ... a "conveyor belt" of sorts for the ocean bottom ... the Juan de Fuca plate is an excellent example ... the material arises along the Juan de Fuca ridge off-shore and is then overridden by the North American plate along the Cascadia fault ... pushing the oceanic material back down, and the continental material stays on top ...

Typically, but not always ... although I can't think of an example of continental material subducting, that doesn't mean it's not possible ...

If an advanced civilization existed when Pangea was a big continent, would we have any evidence of it today?

 

[Hollie]

Here's another question. What can we visibly see of quantum mechanics, Darwinism, and ToE? I think we understand the light is a wave and even a light particle acts as a wave until it is observed. But where did the light (energy) come from?

Any given, light emitting body such as stars?

All of it would fall under EMS. Even quantum particles:

"
Subatomic particles are either "elementary", i.e. not made of multiple other particles, or "composite" and made of more than one elementary particle bound together.

The elementary particles of the Standard Model are:[7]

• Six "flavors" of quarks: up, down, strange, charm, bottom, and top;
• Six types of leptons: electron, electron neutrino, muon, muon neutrino, tau, tau neutrino;
• Twelve gauge bosons (force carriers): the photon of electromagnetism, the three W and Z bosons of the weak force, and the eight gluons of the strong force;
• The Higgs boson.

The Standard Model classification of particles
All of these have now been discovered by experiments, with the latest being the top quark (1995), tau neutrino (2000), and Higgs boson (2012).

Various extensions of the Standard Model predict the existence of an elementary graviton particle and many other elementary particles, but none have been discovered as of 2020."

The most magical, convenient, lower brain satisfying, cheap explanation simply must be the right one. Goddidit! Thank's Occam's Razor

God doesn't take billions of years which no scientific method can verify. Instead, science verifies creationism such as the chicken before the egg and fine tuning facts. Moreover, nobody can answer my question about what was there before the big bang and what did it expand into? The creationists also provided the KCA while atheists have nothing. From Genesis, we know God created space, energy (light), heavens, and Earth first and the set time off later.

Thus, it's the atheist and their scientists who depend on quantum particles (which require space) or some magic that violates the laws of physics such as cosmic inflation.

Some geologists claim the surface (crust) of the Earth could be "recycled" in around five hundred million years; it is one reason why we may not be able to find prehistoric civilizations that may have existed on Earth.

I have no idea of what five hundred million years would be like. I would think these geologists are basing their hypotheses on scientific atheism, a religion.

Why reference work performed by evilutionist atheist scientists when you insist they must be wrong?

 

[ReinyDays]

If an advanced civilization existed when Pangea was a big continent, would we have any evidence of it today?

How advanced and how wide spread? ... a small population of proto-veloraptors using rocks to beak up clams? ... probably not anything we could identify as evidence ... or wide use of refined iron? ... that would be abundant ...

We find fossils of the same type of critter in both Africa and South America ... so the lands these are found on are not being subducted ... and zicron studies in the Canadina Shield show an age of over 4 billion years ...

It's an issue of density ... the lighter frothier materials will float on top while the heavier materials sink down underneath ...

 

[Grumblenuts]

"frothier" <-- a delicious word.

Why reference work performed by evilutionist atheist scientists when you insist they must be wrong?

And here I love science and have deduced the "Standard Model" to be fantasy akin to Bible thumping for at least a decade now. Go figure. Irony seemingly knows no bounds.

 

[Grumblenuts]

The most magical, convenient, lower brain satisfying, cheap explanation simply must be the right one. Goddidit! Thank's Occam's Razor

God doesn't take billions of years which no scientific method can verify. Instead, science verifies creationism such as the chicken before the egg and fine tuning facts. Moreover, nobody can answer my question about what was there before the big bang and what did it expand into? The creationists also provided the KCA while atheists have nothing. From Genesis, we know God created space, energy (light), heavens, and Earth first and the set time off later.

Thus, it's the atheist and their scientists who depend on quantum particles (which require space) or some magic that violates the laws of physics such as cosmic inflation.

Some geologists claim the surface (crust) of the Earth could be "recycled" in around five hundred million years; it is one reason why we may not be able to find prehistoric civilizations that may have existed on Earth.

The irony there being "could be" not at all implying likelihood, i.e. Occam's Razor. Being possible doesn't mean a thing necessarily occurs (within a reasonable time range). Who said "If there is a wrong way to do something, then someone will do it"? Could it have been God? Conversely, if abiogenesis could occur (given organic compounds, sunlight, and millions of years), then no one need "do it."

 

[Grumblenuts]

Corollarially, a word I'm just now coining if no one else has, then given:

• "light" - an "Aether", i.e. a mathematical, geometric, probabilistic, field, "medium", or "firmament" (not some ridiculous "dome", "wave", or "particle")
• A true "void" - no "waters" to hover above or any such silliness
• A universe can exist

It will. Plan or no plan. Like it or not.

 

[JoeB131]

Your science is outdated and can't distinguish between amino acids and proteins. Miller-Urey was wrong about the primal gases in the universe. If they were right about the gases, then the amino acids would not have formed. The experiment produced amino acids, but even with billions of years Miller-Urey's experiment nor any experiment would be able to form these amino acids into proteins due to chirality. There are plenty of amino acids floating in space, but they cannot form proteins outside the cell. That's why only life can create other life. Otherwise, the swan neck flask experiment would have created bacteria just from the broth mix. That went over your head, too, as the already living bacteria in the air was trapped by the swan neck.

Actually, that just shows creationists don't know how labs work.

Miller-Urey established that amino acids can form naturally.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I agree to disagree. From the literature I have consumed, even the crust is recycled through normal plate tectonics and volcanic activity, along with ice ages and temperate ages.

It certainly can be ... but generally what geologists are referring to is the process of new oceanic crust being extruded out of mid-ocean ridges and subsumed in subduction zones ... a "conveyor belt" of sorts for the ocean bottom ... the Juan de Fuca plate is an excellent example ... the material arises along the Juan de Fuca ridge off-shore and is then overridden by the North American plate along the Cascadia fault ... pushing the oceanic material back down, and the continental material stays on top ...

Typically, but not always ... although I can't think of an example of continental material subducting, that doesn't mean it's not possible ...

If an advanced civilization existed when Pangea was a big continent, would we have any evidence of it today?

Yes of course, because the closely related species would show up in the fossil record. That is one way we know this ancient civilization stuff is nonsense.

 

[james bond]

Your science is outdated and can't distinguish between amino acids and proteins. Miller-Urey was wrong about the primal gases in the universe. If they were right about the gases, then the amino acids would not have formed. The experiment produced amino acids, but even with billions of years Miller-Urey's experiment nor any experiment would be able to form these amino acids into proteins due to chirality. There are plenty of amino acids floating in space, but they cannot form proteins outside the cell. That's why only life can create other life. Otherwise, the swan neck flask experiment would have created bacteria just from the broth mix. That went over your head, too, as the already living bacteria in the air was trapped by the swan neck.

Actually, that just shows creationists don't know how labs work.

Miller-Urey established that amino acids can form naturally.

You freakin' idiot. I just told you that there are plenty of amino acids out there in outer space. Now, what important part did you stupidly miss?

Never mind.

This may as well be you in front of the judge.

You better throw yourself on the mercy of the court.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Your science is outdated and can't distinguish between amino acids and proteins. Miller-Urey was wrong about the primal gases in the universe. If they were right about the gases, then the amino acids would not have formed. The experiment produced amino acids, but even with billions of years Miller-Urey's experiment nor any experiment would be able to form these amino acids into proteins due to chirality. There are plenty of amino acids floating in space, but they cannot form proteins outside the cell. That's why only life can create other life. Otherwise, the swan neck flask experiment would have created bacteria just from the broth mix. That went over your head, too, as the already living bacteria in the air was trapped by the swan neck.

Actually, that just shows creationists don't know how labs work.

Miller-Urey established that amino acids can form naturally.

Indeed, not to mention inspiring "an entirely new field of study" :

The experiment was a success in that amino acids, the building blocks of life, were produced during the simulation. The finding was so significant that it kick-started an entirely new field of study: Prebiotic Chemistry.

Scientists now have reason to believe that the gases used in the Miller-Urey simulation were not actually the same as those of the ancient atmosphere. Because of this, many experiments have since been done, testing a wide variety of atmospheres and different environmental conditions. The results are overwhelming: the molecules of life can form under a wide variety of ancient Earth-like conditions.

Many questions about the origin of life remain to be answered but these findings give strong support to the idea that the first living cells on Earth may have emerged from natural chemical reactions.

 

[ReinyDays]

I just told you that there are plenty of amino acids out there in outer space. Now, what important part did you stupidly miss?

The part about non-chiral amino acids never linking together into proteins outside living cells ... glycine for example ... there is a natural affinity between amino groups and organic acid groups ... they readily bond no matter the chirality ...