Guess who has the burden of proof!

[Orangecat]

You can’t hide behind ignorance of science.

Why would I want to hide behind you?
You post theories and act as if they're facts. Poor form, that.

 

[Ringtone]

It's one thing to argue for the existence of a First Cause. Quite another thing to prove that it was your version of this First Cause that was responsible for everything.

Yes, of course it is. Per the first principles of metaphysics, logic and physics, we know that the physical world began to exist. Only utter nincompoops allege to argue from the imperatives of logic and simultaneously deny the ontological imperative of sufficient cause or reason. The divinity of classical theism is the only empirically and rationally justifiable candidate. There's only a very small handful of religious traditions that are classically theistic. Of the few, there's only one that thoroughly accounts for the facts of reality.

In the meantime, naturalism/materialism is inherently contradictory, self-negating.

If I had to choose Hindu Cosmogony makes the most sense

Hindu cosmogony has been scientifically falsified for some years. A cyclic universe or any other cannot be past eternal. No physical entity can be past eternal. But, then, that's readily self-evident from the imperatives of logic. The universe, an entity of divisible magnitude and, therefore, finite, necessarily began to exist. Hindu cosmogony is the stuff of irrationality and myth.

 

[Ringtone]

Why would any Christian need to prove that the earth was created by the god 6000 years ago?
just take it on faith and move on.

It's not a topic to debate or that needs proving. It just IS and only Satan would say it ISN'T!

Why would any Christian believe that the Earth was created 6000 years ago?

 

[Orangecat]

He would by definition know all things.

Does he care about my well being?

 

[Hollie]

There is nothing to indicate your gods or anyone else’s gods caused the expansion. Can you offer anything to indicate that a supernatural event caused by your gods was the reason.

I don't have any gods. I'm just not so pompous as to believe I know how life and the universe started, like you obviously are.
A god is just as plausible as your theory, perhaps moreso depending on your definition of "god".
An "expansion" caused life to begin from nothing? Ok, boomer.

I don't claim to know with certainty the specifics of how the universe started or precisely how life began. We can, however, make a rational and reasoned case for abiogenesis as a natural phenomenon without intervention of supernatural agents. The processes of biological evolution follow readily from there.

1) The evidence that evolution has occurred is overwhelming and comes from multiple different sources, each of which independently establishes the identical pattern of evolutionary descent. The sources for that evidence come independently from anatomy, genetics, biogeography, biochemistry and the fossil record.

2) The fossil record of human evolution from apelike ancestors is particular;y rich and well documented with multiple intermediate species between modern humans and those ancestors.

3) Different species do not exchange genetic information. One species evolves into another species by accumulating genetic mutations over many generations, until such time that enough genetic distance is established to prevent interbreeding. This is what the “ring species” demonstrate so elegantly.

4) The genetic mutations within species are “synchronized and harmonized” through the many well understood processes we together call “population genetics.” I am happy to also go into much greater depth here if you are interested.

5) Genetic mutations between different species are not “synchronized” or “harmonized,” so there is no mechanism that requires proposal.

6) There are several competing explanations for abiogenesis, and the current research in the field is extensive and fruitful. But the point remains, (snark) the first DNA was seeded on Earth by space aliens, or created by Allah, Maybe Vishnu or perhaps by a formidable, unionized consortium of gods.

6.5) Humans evolved from Apelike ancestors. The evolution of all living things since that original DNA is established scientific fact.

Utter hogwash! The myths of abiogenesis and evolution are solely predicated on the metaphysical presupposition of naturalism/materialism, the atheist's religion, which is neither logically nor scientifically verifiable. The naturalist/materialist begs the question, unwittingly assumes his conclusion in his premise, and calls his religious convictions science.

In the meantime. . . .

Abiogenesis: The Unholy Grail of Atheism

Oh, gawd. Not that collection of paste and paste nonsense again.

I wrote it, and it's predicated on prevailing science. But you won't read it or directly refute it. That's not your style, Hollie. You just spout ad hominem and slogans in the face of the rational and empirical evidence that falsifies the tenets of your religion. You're a fanatic, a broken record, a smile and a shoeshine, all hat and no cattle, more at, all mouth and no common sense. You don't know or really understand squat about the pertinent biochemistry anymore than you grasp the metaphysical nature of your assumptions. You're a mindless denizen of scientism, a total phony.

LOL!

View attachment 438269

I’m not clear on the prevailing science that supports partisan religious beliefs.

Can you identify which of the sciences support a 6,000 year old planet, men living to be 900 years old, Arks embarking on pleasure cruises, talking snakes, men rising from the dead?

Thanks,

Thanks, again.

 

[Ringtone]

He would by definition know all things.

Does he care about my well being?

By definition he would be the very essence of goodness, so, yes, he cares about your well-being.

 

[Hollie]

You can’t hide behind ignorance of science.

Why would I want to hide behind you?
You post theories and act as if they're facts. Poor form, that.

Is biological evolution not a fact?

 

[Orangecat]

By definition he would be the very essence of goodness, so, yes, he cares about your well-being.

Wouldn't he also be the very essence of badness, assuming he is the creator of all things?

 

[Orangecat]

Is biological evolution not a fact?

It's an observable phenomenon that doesn't even come close to explaining where life began or why it struggles to survive and reproduce.

 

[Ringtone]

There is nothing to indicate your gods or anyone else’s gods caused the expansion. Can you offer anything to indicate that a supernatural event caused by your gods was the reason.

I don't have any gods. I'm just not so pompous as to believe I know how life and the universe started, like you obviously are.
A god is just as plausible as your theory, perhaps moreso depending on your definition of "god".
An "expansion" caused life to begin from nothing? Ok, boomer.

I don't claim to know with certainty the specifics of how the universe started or precisely how life began. We can, however, make a rational and reasoned case for abiogenesis as a natural phenomenon without intervention of supernatural agents. The processes of biological evolution follow readily from there.

1) The evidence that evolution has occurred is overwhelming and comes from multiple different sources, each of which independently establishes the identical pattern of evolutionary descent. The sources for that evidence come independently from anatomy, genetics, biogeography, biochemistry and the fossil record.

2) The fossil record of human evolution from apelike ancestors is particular;y rich and well documented with multiple intermediate species between modern humans and those ancestors.

3) Different species do not exchange genetic information. One species evolves into another species by accumulating genetic mutations over many generations, until such time that enough genetic distance is established to prevent interbreeding. This is what the “ring species” demonstrate so elegantly.

4) The genetic mutations within species are “synchronized and harmonized” through the many well understood processes we together call “population genetics.” I am happy to also go into much greater depth here if you are interested.

5) Genetic mutations between different species are not “synchronized” or “harmonized,” so there is no mechanism that requires proposal.

6) There are several competing explanations for abiogenesis, and the current research in the field is extensive and fruitful. But the point remains, (snark) the first DNA was seeded on Earth by space aliens, or created by Allah, Maybe Vishnu or perhaps by a formidable, unionized consortium of gods.

6.5) Humans evolved from Apelike ancestors. The evolution of all living things since that original DNA is established scientific fact.

Utter hogwash! The myths of abiogenesis and evolution are solely predicated on the metaphysical presupposition of naturalism/materialism, the atheist's religion, which is neither logically nor scientifically verifiable. The naturalist/materialist begs the question, unwittingly assumes his conclusion in his premise, and calls his religious convictions science.

In the meantime. . . .

Abiogenesis: The Unholy Grail of Atheism

Oh, gawd. Not that collection of paste and paste nonsense again.

I wrote it, and it's predicated on prevailing science. But you won't read it or directly refute it. That's not your style, Hollie. You just spout ad hominem and slogans in the face of the rational and empirical evidence that falsifies the tenets of your religion. You're a fanatic, a broken record, a smile and a shoeshine, all hat and no cattle, more at, all mouth and no common sense. You don't know or really understand squat about the pertinent biochemistry anymore than you grasp the metaphysical nature of your assumptions. You're a mindless denizen of scientism, a total phony.

LOL!

View attachment 438269

I’m not clear on the prevailing science that supports partisan religious beliefs.

Can you identify which of the sciences support a 6,000 year old planet, men living to be 900 years old, Arks embarking on pleasure cruises, talking snakes, men rising from the dead?

Thanks,

Thanks, again.

The Bible doesn't tell us how old the Earth is, let alone how old the universe is. You got that notion from Ussher, not the Bible. And what does science have to do with miracles? What pseudoscientific piffle is this?

First you aver not to know anything about how the physical world came into existence, in spite of what the ramifications of the first principles of logic and metaphysics tell us. Now you flatly claim to know that it has always existed, howbeit, unwittingly, despite the absurdity of an actual infinite, or that it came into existence sans a sufficient cause. Magic! Make up your mind.

 

[Ringtone]

By definition he would be the very essence of goodness, so, yes, he cares about your well-being.

Wouldn't he also be the very essence of badness, assuming he is the creator of all things?

Why would he be the Creator of all things? Think about that very carefully before you answer.

 

[Hollie]

Is biological evolution not a fact?

It's an observable phenomenon that doesn't even come close to explaining where life began or why it struggles to survive and reproduce.

How life began is not addressed by biological evolution. I’m surprised you didn’t learn such things beginning in grade school.

The term “fitness for survival” represents an entire body of knowledge about survival and reproduction. This also is something you have been exposed to in grade school.

 

[Hollie]

By definition he would be the very essence of goodness, so, yes, he cares about your well-being.

Wouldn't he also be the very essence of badness, assuming he is the creator of all things?

Why would he be the Creator of all things? Think about that very carefully before you answer.

Shiva is personified as male. The inventors of Shiva and your gods are a male dominated and controlled society, thus the gods are male.

Similarly, the western portrayal of Jeebus is a tall, fair-haired, fair-skinned Caucasian looking guy. Which makes some sense as Jeebus is maintained in the image of those who are comfortable with that look,

 

[Hollie]

Is biological evolution not a fact?

It's an observable phenomenon that doesn't even come close to explaining where life began or why it struggles to survive and reproduce.

How life began is not addressed by biological evolution. I’m surprised you didn’t learn such things beginning in grade school.

The term “fitness for survival” represents an entire body of knowledge about survival and reproduction. This also is something you have been exposed to in grade school.

I never said it was, liar. As usual, you're just making things up.

You’re completely flummoxed. You’re so special, you didn’t realize my post wasn’t directed to you.

How about a nice hot cup of tea and a nap?

 

[Ringtone]

By definition he would be the very essence of goodness, so, yes, he cares about your well-being.

Wouldn't he also be the very essence of badness, assuming he is the creator of all things?

Why would he be the Creator of all things? Think about that very carefully before you answer.

Shiva is personified as male. The inventors of Shiva and your gods are the result of a male dominated and controlled society, thus the gods are male.

Similarly, the western portrayal of Jeebus is a tall, fair-haired, fair-skinned Caucasian looking guy. Which makes some sense as Jeebus is maintained in the image of those who are comfortable with that look,

Shiva and Jeebus are putatively created beings, you dunce, just like your god, namely, yourself. LOL!

 

[Ringtone]

Is biological evolution not a fact?

It's an observable phenomenon that doesn't even come close to explaining where life began or why it struggles to survive and reproduce.

How life began is not addressed by biological evolution. I’m surprised you didn’t learn such things beginning in grade school.

The term “fitness for survival” represents an entire body of knowledge about survival and reproduction. This also is something you have been exposed to in grade school.

I thought it was directed at me. But you're right. My error. I deleted the post with my apologies.

 

[Hollie]

By definition he would be the very essence of goodness, so, yes, he cares about your well-being.

Wouldn't he also be the very essence of badness, assuming he is the creator of all things?

Why would he be the Creator of all things? Think about that very carefully before you answer.

Shiva is personified as male. The inventors of Shiva and your gods are the result of a male dominated and controlled society, thus the gods are male.

Similarly, the western portrayal of Jeebus is a tall, fair-haired, fair-skinned Caucasian looking guy. Which makes some sense as Jeebus is maintained in the image of those who are comfortable with that look,

Shiva and Jeebus are putatively created beings, you dunce, just like your god, namely, yourself. LOL!

Just like your gods. One of three pick and choose gods. Just a modification of gods that existed before your gods.

 

[Ringtone]

Is biological evolution not a fact?

It's an observable phenomenon that doesn't even come close to explaining where life began or why it struggles to survive and reproduce.

Evolution is not an observable phenomenon. Do not be deceived. The only thing we may know for certain from the physical evidence is that specious of roughly increasing complexity have appeared over time and some have gone extinct. Naturalists/materialists do not observe common ancestry; they presuppose it. There is absolutely nothing in the fossil record or in the science of genetics that falsifies a biological history of common design over time. Hocus Pocus.

 

[BreezeWood]

He would by definition know all things.

Does he care about my well being?

By definition he would be the very essence of goodness, so, yes, he cares about your well-being.

.

By definition he (they) would be the very essence of goodness, so, yes, he (they) cares about your well-being.

.
it's obvious by definition - ringtone is a fraud.

and no, only were you to accomplish on your own the feat for a justifiable judgement, your existence would not be noticed - the prescribed religion of antiquity.

 

[Orangecat]

Why would he be the Creator of all things? Think about that very carefully before you answer.

Why wouldn't he be? It seems to me that people arbitrarily assign whatever powers they'd like to their idea of "God", the most common being the omniscient and omnipotent creator of heaven and earth.