For instance on Mt. Rushmore there is a carving of 4 presidents. Could that ever be formed by chance.
Science have proven the Earth to be non-static. Which means the universe had a beginning that makes chance impossible. Because there is not infinite possibilites for it to shape the fine tuning of the universe.
Here is some science
http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/audio/newevidence.htm
Also DNA is coding, which science know that comes about through intelligent design.
If the universe had a beginning then God must dwell outside of time. Therefore not needing in an enviroment or anything to exist.
2006-12-01 04:38:41 · 19 answers · asked by ۞ JønaŦhan ۞ 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5955663642317205059
Here's a video aboud DNA
2006-12-01 04:45:27 · update #1
Natural Proccess hahaha is that something that occurs without any reason. Kinda like randomness.
2006-12-01 05:46:51 · update #2
Wow. What a great question - here's what I can give you.
>> For instance on Mt. Rushmore there is a carving of 4 presidents. Could that ever be formed by chance.
Mt. Rushmore is not chance. It was designed - you're absolutely right. But here's the thing about Mt. Rushmore - it's a rock. It's not a living creature that procreates and creates copies of its DNA. It doesn't 'evolve' - it 'erodes' or 'grows' based on seizmological shifts or natrual forces, at best. There's only one Mt. Rushmore. Now, if you were to give an example where a mountain can reproduce, and over millions of generations creates Mt. Rushmore, then you might have an actual relevant anaolgy. In this case though, yours fails the basic property that evolution is based upon - successive generations. This is known as a "Straw-man logical fallacy" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man ). So, next time when you'd like to give an example that relates to evolution, please pick a more appropriate one. No, a watch on the beach does not qualify, nor does a 747.
>> Science have proven the Earth to be non-static. Which means the universe had a beginning that makes chance impossible. Because there is not infinite possibilites for it to shape the fine tuning of the universe.
The earth was formed through planetites attracting each other by gravity, and slowly started to rotate to form the earth we know and love today. The earth undergoes climate changes, and polarization changes, so yes - it is non-static.
>> Which means the universe had a beginning that makes chance impossible.
See, what you did just there was throw out a "Red herring." ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi ). Your point about the earth's beginning is not relevant to the discussion of the Universe's beginning - those are two separate incidents. Nobody knows how the big bang started - string theory suggests that two branes ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brane ) collided, as a possiblity. But really, we don't know. To suppose that we do know and to assume that it was a creator, is assuming far too much.
>> Because there is not infinite possibilites for it to shape the fine tuning of the universe.
Of course there is an infinite amount of possibilities for "fine tuning" - mostly because the set of real numbers is an infinite set ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_numbers ). That means each of our constants for things (such as Planck's constant, Cavendish constant, the speed of light) could have an infinite amount of values - far beyond a decimal point where it would make a difference on the physical structure of the universe. For all we know - there *ARE* an infinite set of universes out there!
>> Also DNA is coding, which science know that comes about through intelligent design.
Actually, scientists don't think that at all. The Miller-Urey experiment ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller-Urey ) showed that basic organic compounds could be formed through electrically charged gases in the earth's early atmosphere. From there, they think that the RNA-hypothesis ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA_world_hypothesis ) is responsible for the rest.
>> If the universe had a beginning then God must dwell outside of time. Therefore not needing in an enviroment or anything to exist.
Ah, but why is god there in the first place? How can god exist "forever" out of nothing? Certainly nothing comes from nothing, right? Does god have any more reason to exist than our universe does? Be honest with yourself - this argument doesn't actually get you any further than what the scientists know from the Big Bang onwards.
2006-12-01 04:57:06 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The universe had a beginning. Therefore, ONE religion on ONE planet in ONE galaxy out of billions of galaxies, founded two millennia ago in a universe that was created fifteen million millennia ago, is correct -- and all other religions are wrong. I don't see how you get from point A to point B.
"Also DNA is coding, which science know that comes about through intelligent design."
You do realize that Intelligent Design is pseudoscience, right?
"If the universe had a beginning then God must dwell outside of time."
That doesn't even make any sense. This is why Intelligent Design and "creationism" are not science. How can you possibly prove something like that?
2006-12-01 12:45:12 · answer #2 · answered by . 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Hunny - the sculpture of the 4 presidents on Mt. Rushmore was done by people, not "god" or "nature" - people did it. There are photographs existing that show the mountain before, during and after the sculpture was done.
Science has proven no such thing, Snookiedimples. All science can do is postulate - theorize, question, examine and extrapolate from currently available data. Most all scientists of ANY legitimate reputation consider "intelligent design" to be a crock of horsehockey.
2006-12-01 12:43:34 · answer #3 · answered by sewmouse 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
"Formed by chance"?
You forgot the third option, the one responsible for most of what's around us: that which is the product of natural processes.
Obviously Mt. Rushmore wasn't "formed by chance" - we know that it was designed and intentionally built. It's hard to imagine why anyone would fail to take that into account. If we know that someone designed and intentionally built something, then we believe that it was designed and intentionally built. It's really not that difficult a question.
Try it this way: imagine that I asked you to give me the names of the people who designed Mt. Rushmore. Think you could find them? Maybe through Google?
Now imagine that I asked you to give me the names of the people who designed the first DNA molecules. Forget it - there's no way you'd be able to do that. Instead, you'll just say "It was God", which of course is not at all the same kind of answer. It's really no different from saying "it just happened by magic".
===============
Later: If you don't know the difference between "natural process" and "random", you need to do a LOT of reading. You may think that's funny, but you're just revealing your ignorance.
2006-12-01 12:46:36 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Nobody knows how life was created. Of course Mt. Rushmore was not created by chance. That's a ridiculous analogy to use.
For Christians, Jews, etc...their catch all is a god. For example:
Where did we come from: god
Who created the earth: god
Why am I sick?: god
Why are there wars: god
God is your answer for EVERYTHING, and yet, it answers nothing.
I, an Atheist, thrive on learning and knowledge. I know that there is no definates in this world, and I'm okay with that. I know that some day, long after I'm gone, there will be an answer.
I just don't think it's god. That's all.
2006-12-01 12:44:34 · answer #5 · answered by Heck if I know! 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Congrats. You get the prize for lamest question this week....
Yes, DNA is created intelligently, while Mt. Rushmore happened by chance...
Will there ever be an end to the lack of Americans abillity to form a coherant and intelligent argument?
2006-12-01 12:44:41 · answer #6 · answered by YDoncha_Blowme 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Everything is created by natural processes, not chance. Rushmore could have formed by a natural process, but you would have to look for it. Just because it is very unlikely that it did, doesn't automatically mean it didn't. But there is plenty of evidence that shows that humans created it if you get up there. You will see tool marks and I am sure if you dig around a little you will find broken tools and residue of the explosives. Where is your evidence of God?
The rest of what you said is nonsense and just sounds desperate.
2006-12-01 13:37:28 · answer #7 · answered by Alex 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Science hasn't proven the universe had a beginning-that awaits the formulation of a theory of quantum gravity. Get back to us when such a theory is in existence, and we can debate on the basis of a proven scientific fact.
2006-12-01 12:45:13 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
so your telling me that its more believeable that a superinteligent god came into existance from nothing that had super powers that allowd him to create anything he wanted from nothing than the fact that all of the matter in the universe came into existance at one spot and then exploded forming everything we know today?
i mean for someone to believe that a god came from nowhere and that he created everything in the universe from nothing is twice as unbelieveable to me as the fact that that all of the mater came from nothing.
im agnostic but i think athiests are more likely to be correct, because for a religion to be correct they have 2 unanswered questions as compared to an athiest only having 1 unanswered question.
2006-12-01 12:46:39 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
this is not an answer. I just want to comment on your information. These are very good arguments; very convincing. I don't belong to any religion nor am I an atheist, but I am skeptical sometimes about the existence of a creator. You make a very logical point there. Thanks for using science to defend your side instead of just using emotion, ethics, and abstract concepts
2006-12-01 12:58:00 · answer #10 · answered by tk_tembo 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋