Zone1 Who created all things?

[LuckyDuck01!]

Actually it's even simpler than that.

George Wald explains:

Now, to leave the elementary particles and go on to atoms, to elements. Of the 92 natural elements, ninety-nine percent of the living matter we know is composed of just four: hydrogen (H), oxygen (O), nitrogen (N), and carbon (C). That is bound to be true wherever life exists in the universe, for only those four elements possess the unique properties upon which life depends.

Their unique position in chemistry can be stated in a sentence: They -- in the order given -- are the lightest elements that achieve stable electronic configurations (i.e., those mimicking the inert gases) by gaining respectively one, two, three, and four electrons. Gaining electrons, in the sense of sharing them with other atoms, is the mechanism of forming chemical bonds, hence molecules. The lightest elements make not only the tightest bonds, hence the most stable molecules, but introduce a unique property crucial for life: of all the natural elements, only oxygen, nitrogen and carbon regularly form double and triple bonds with one another, so saturating all their tendencies to combine further.

Now, professors sometimes tell their students foolish things, which the students carefully learn and reproduce on exams and eventually teach the next generation. When chemistry professors teach the periodic system of elements, one has those horizontal periods of the elements and the professors say, “If you go down vertically, the elements repeat their same properties.” That is utter nonsense, as any kid with a chemistry set would know. For under oxygen comes sulfur. Try breathing sulfur somethime. Under nitrogen comes phosphorus. There is not any phosphorus in that kid’s chemistry set. It is too dangerous; it bursts into flame spontaneously on exposure to air. And under carbon comes silicon.

If that chemistry professor were talking sense, there are two molecules that should have very similar properties: carbon dioxide (CO2) and silicon dioxide (SiO2). Well, in carbon dioxide the central carbon is tied to both of the oxygen atoms by double bonds O=C=O. Those double bonds completely saturate the combining tendencies of all three atoms, hence CO2 is a happy, independent molecule. It goes off in the air as a gas, and dissolves in all the waters of the Earth, and those are the places from which living organisms extract their carbon.

But silicon cannot form a double bond, hence in silicon dioxide the central silicon is tied to the two oxygens only by single bonds, leaving four half‑formed bonds -- four unpaired electrons -- two on the silicon and one on each oxygen, ready to pair with any other available lone electrons. But where can one find them? Obviously on neighboring silicone dioxide molecules, so each molecule binds to the next, and that to the next, and on and on until you end up with a rock -- for example quartz, which is just silicone dioxide molecules bound to one another to form a great super-molecule. The reason quartz is so hard is that to break it one must break numerous chemical bonds. And that is why, though silicon is 135 times as plentiful as carbon in the Earth’s surface, it makes rocks, and to make living organisms one must turn to carbon. I could make a parallel argument for oxygen and nitrogen.

These four elements, Hydrogen, carbon, oxygen and nitrogen, also provide an example of the astonishing togetherness of our universe. They make up the “organic” molecules that constitute living organisms on a planet, and the nuclei of these same elements interact to generate the light of its star. Then the organisms on the planet come to depend wholly on that starlight, as they must if life is to persist. So it is that all life on the Earth runs on sunlight. I do not need spiritual enlightenment to know that I am one with the universe -- that is just good physics.

George Wald: Life and Mind in the Universe

I'm aware of all this, however, I was just pointing out a single exo-planet for and example.

 

[Paradoxical#1]

Either one lives to do Jesus' Fathers will to stand on Gods side, or they are mislead into opposition by satan.

Prove it.

 

[Paradoxical#1]

They subordinate religion like you do. What was it you said? Religion is highly detrimental to society and should be abolished? So what it has to do with this is you can't be objective about religion.

That's a ridiculous comparison. I hate socialism but I must be one because I think religion is the biggest con job in the history of mankind?

 

[ding]

I'm aware of all this, however, I was just pointing out a single exo-planet for and example.

Were you aware that if the structure of atoms was even slightly different that the universe could have been created in the exact same way but life could have never evolved?

 

[ding]

That's a ridiculous comparison. I hate socialism but I must be one because I think religion is the biggest con job in the history of mankind?

For a guy that hates socialism you sure do do a lot of their dirty work for them.

 

[Paradoxical#1]

For a guy that hates socialism you sure do do a lot of their dirty work for them.

You are the weakest debater and defender of Catholicism I ever encountered.

 

[ding]

You are the weakest debater and defender of Catholicism I ever encountered.

That's nice.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Science tells us that it hasn't always existed, that the universe had a beginning. Before that, it wasn't, now it is.

No, science doesn't tell us anything of the sort.

What you're referring to is the "Big Bang Theory". Now, it's a theory. We don't know if it's true.

What we're finding out now is that time goes at different speeds. So, the more mass there is, time goes faster. So, on Earth time goes faster due to the mass of the Earth, than it does for satellites going around the Earth.

How Much Does Time Dilate for the ISS Astronauts? – ideonexus

"The ISS orbits 255 miles above the Earth at 8000 m/s, so time runs approximately 0.0000000014 percent slower."

So, very, very small numbers, but still significant enough that they have to program this into satellites so they remain accurate.

Interestingly your feet will be older than your head.

Now imagine parts of space where there's no mass for millions of light years. That light will be going so much slower.

Imagine we see things from billions of light ago, how can we hope to measure what's going on? How can we form an accurate opinion of how the universe was formed when everything we see has gone through different times?

Also, even if there had been a Big Bang, that doesn't mean the energy was created at this time.

Imagine all this energy out there got ejected from the Big Bang, and is moving to another point where it will attract together and form one huge black hole and then all the energy collapses in on itself and produces another Big Bang. It's perfectly plausible that the universe just reinvents itself.

We can't know whether this happens because there won't be any evidence of this at all, because all the energy would have ended up in the same point at the same time. You can't see beyond that.

Also, even if there were

 

[Alter2Ego]

I thought God was spiritual.

How can God create things if he's not physical?

John 4:24​

"God is a Spirit, and those worshipping him must worship with spirit and truth.”


There's your answer, frigidweirdo.


Alter2Ego

 

[Alter2Ego]

What I don't get is why humans claim the bible is inspired by some god in the first place. Where is the proof?

Paradoxical#1:

The 2,000+ accurately fulfilled prophecies contained therein is the proof that the Judeo-Christian Bible was written by divine inspiration of Jehovah God. Some of these prophecies have been confirmed by secular historians and archeology.

2 Peter 1:21​

"For prophecy was at no time brought by man’s will, but men spoke from God as they were moved by holy spirit."



Alter2Ego

 

[frigidweirdo]

John 4:24​

"God is a Spirit, and those worshipping him must worship with spirit and truth.”


There's your answer, frigidweirdo.


Alter2Ego

Nope, quoting the Bible does not prove anything. Try again.

 

[Alter2Ego]

Nope, quoting the Bible does not prove anything. Try again.

frigidweirdo:

This might come to you as a shock, but you are in no position to tell me what I can and cannot do. You, meantime, are free to continue to post tripe that makes no sense. Take, for example, your nonsensical claim that God is physical. Such idiocy.


Alter2Ego

 

[cnm]

Who created all things?​

The Self Creator.

Duh...

 

[frigidweirdo]

frigidweirdo:

This might come to you as a shock, but you are in no position to tell me what I can and cannot do. You, meantime, are free to continue to post tripe that makes no sense.


Alter2Ego

Well, actually I am. You want to have a proper conversation, then don't post the Bible.

Otherwise this conversation is over. Either way, I couldn't give a damn.

But you say I post "tripe", it's funny how you said energy was created, then I posted SCIENCE and suddenly you dropped that idea.

I get it, I get it, I see it enough on here, when you don't have a proper argument, go off on one and tell everyone they're talking nonsense

I think we're done, don't you?

Bye bye

 

[Alter2Ego]

Well, actually I am. You want to have a proper conversation, then don't post the Bible.

Otherwise this conversation is over. Either way, I couldn't give a damn.

But you say I post "tripe", it's funny how you said energy was created, then I posted SCIENCE and suddenly you dropped that idea.

I get it, I get it, I see it enough on here, when you don't have a proper argument, go off on one and tell everyone they're talking nonsense

I think we're done, don't you?

Bye bye

frigidweirdo:

One more smart remark from you like the above, and you will be sent to my "Ignore" list where I won't have to waste time scrolling past your tripe. I told you already that you're in no position to tell me what to do. There are seven people on my "Ignore" list already. There's room for plenty more.


Alter2Ego

 

[Paradoxical#1]

Paradoxical#1:

The 2,000+ accurately fulfilled prophecies contained therein is the proof that the Judeo-Christian Bible was written by divine inspiration of Jehovah God. Some of these prophecies have been confirmed by secular historians and archeology.

2 Peter 1:21​

"For prophecy was at no time brought by man’s will, but men spoke from God as they were moved by holy spirit."



Alter2Ego

Give me one.

 

[frigidweirdo]

frigidweirdo:

One more smart remark from you like the above, and you will be sent to my "Ignore" list where I won't have to waste time scrolling past your tripe. I told you already that you're in no position to tell me what to do. There are seven people on my "Ignore" list already. There's room for plenty more.


Alter2Ego

Smart remark.

Bye

 

[hadit]

No, science doesn't tell us anything of the sort.

What you're referring to is the "Big Bang Theory". Now, it's a theory. We don't know if it's true.

All indications at this point say that the universe began in an instant at a point and has been expanding ever since. Some force other than gravity is pushing it to expand, and we don't know what that is.

What we're finding out now is that time goes at different speeds. So, the more mass there is, time goes faster. So, on Earth time goes faster due to the mass of the Earth, than it does for satellites going around the Earth.

How Much Does Time Dilate for the ISS Astronauts? – ideonexus

"The ISS orbits 255 miles above the Earth at 8000 m/s, so time runs approximately 0.0000000014 percent slower."

So, very, very small numbers, but still significant enough that they have to program this into satellites so they remain accurate.

Interestingly your feet will be older than your head.

Now imagine parts of space where there's no mass for millions of light years. That light will be going so much slower.

The speed of light in a vacuum is constant. It cannot and does not change.

Imagine we see things from billions of light ago, how can we hope to measure what's going on? How can we form an accurate opinion of how the universe was formed when everything we see has gone through different times?

It hasn't, that's the point. Light moving through a vacuum always moves at the same speed.

Also, even if there had been a Big Bang, that doesn't mean the energy was created at this time.

Actually, the Big Bang theory postulates that the universe started as pure energy because matter only formed after it cooled down enough for elementary particles to coalesce into being.

Imagine all this energy out there got ejected from the Big Bang, and is moving to another point where it will attract together and form one huge black hole and then all the energy collapses in on itself and produces another Big Bang. It's perfectly plausible that the universe just reinvents itself.

Except the universe is expanding fast enough that gravity can't pull it back together. If it stops expanding, it could contract again into a Big Crunch, followed by a bounce, but as of right now, the expansion is actually accelerating. Something is causing the universe to expand faster and faster. If it does not stop, eventually there will be nothing to see in the night sky except for our local galaxy cluster.

We can't know whether this happens because there won't be any evidence of this at all, because all the energy would have ended up in the same point at the same time. You can't see beyond that.

Also, even if there were

Let's clear a few things up here.

1. Light speed in a vacuum doesn't change. A photon does not experience time, to a photon there is no time between when it was generated in the heart of a star and when it is absorbed by your retina.
2. The relative speed of time does change when an object is moving. If a spacecraft contains a clock and the craft is moving relative to an observer outside the craft, the observer will see the clock running slower.
3. An observer inside the craft does not see his clock slow down. To him, nothing has changed.
4. If an object could travel at light speed, an outside observer would see the clock stop while an observer inside the craft would experience no time at all until he slowed down below light speed. To him the trip would be instantaneous, he would see one location then in the next instant a different location. Of course, that cannot happen. Mass cannot travel at light speed.

 

[ding]

What you're referring to is the "Big Bang Theory". Now, it's a theory. We don't know if it's true.

It's understandable how the universe popping into existence being created from nothing hardwired to produce intelligence would threaten your atheistic worldview. It's so improbable that it could have only been an intentional act. After all, it is the nature of intelligence to create intelligence. And I can't think of anything more intelligent than a self assembling creation which produces intelligence because the constant presence of mind made it so.