For those of you who don't believe we have a creator....?

Question

What are your opinions of how the universe was made and how life came to be on earth? Or do you think there must be a creator?

When writting this question I wasn't really bothered about which category it was in I just wanted opinions on the question wether you see it as religious or scientific or whatever so appologies for that. I would be interesed on you views about the actual question.

Answer 1

I can understand why you came to this section for your question - any non-believer that has any sense wouldn't be lurking in the religious section looking for an argument. It's such a waste of time.

The universe was not made - the universe is. Life came to be because the conditions for life evolved out from the start of the planet itself. The planet was not created to support life - the planet only has conditions condusive for letting life happen in the first place.

Answer 2

Most humans cannot understand this topic. That's why they keep inventing a creator. Humans need limits/borders. There aren't any, if you're talking life and the universe.

The universe just is. It isn't created, it will never disappear (it may change significantly though). There no beginning or end (there may be a beginning of -time-, because that's a human invention!), there is no inside and outside, there cannot be a creator. There is nothing/no one "outside" the universe that can have created it. If there would be a creator, he/she/it would have been created, so who created the creator of the creator's creator ?!?

Life is not something that started at the flick of a switch. It is a bunch of molecules, much like other matter in the universe. We think it is special because we are made from it. Sure, there are some pretty complex interactions between those molecules, but this can be found in other stuff as well. Try a sun.

If things just went a little different, we would be asking ourselves if there would be life on that blue planet we can see in the sky, if it also would be silicon based and if they could survive without sufficient temperatures to liquefy the lead. Or would all this H2O be so toxic that no life could ever exist? Or maybe things did not have to be different, maybe such life already exists and we're just too stupid and arrogant, thinking we are alone and special.

Answer 3

Methinks he thinks he is sensible. It's so adorable whilst they are trying. To cope with your feedback: In order to consider in some thing, you ought to first have a perception of the suggestion or item. Without realizing approximately it, perception in some thing is unimaginable (or with out which means, take you choose). Because of this axiom (idea precedes perception), some thing of which we do not need a idea isn't believed and as a consequence loss of perception is the default. Probabilities may also be calculated situated on concurrent and hooked up phenomena concerning the mentioned premise. In the illustration of author vs. no author, we will formulate targeted predictions approximately what else we could discover (cough, proof, cough). Based on those findings, or lack thereof, we will alter the possibility thus. "That is naturally an evasion that's initiated considering the fact that now you do not must protect a perception. It's a debating tactic. In all functional points, there's no change among believing that there's no Creator and no perception in any author." Quite the opposite, it's you who're making an attempt to transform a non-perception right into a perception in a paltry try to weaken her role. The functional change among the 2, which I admit most commonly hasn't happened to you, is that Sirensong, in announcing "I don't consider in a author," isn't hanging forth a declare of distinctive capabilities. edit: "There are many matters that you do not consider to be the reality however that's now not the query. I quite simply requested what you consider to be the reality. Why is that this so tricky?" No you did not. Please reread your preliminary query, as mentioned earlier than you started arguing. You proposed a declaration of perception and proceeded to implicitly use it on all individuals who didn't preserve the confident perception in a author. You then asserted that it was once an unprovable perception. The responders reformulated the declaration into extra suitable wording and tried to exhibit wherein you have been in mistakes. Lest you feel I'm mendacity right here, recollect that during a couple of of your responses to these men and women, you insisted that the 2 terms "no perception in a author" and "perception in no author" have been interchangeable. Had you simplest meant to handle individuals who held the latter, you might have performed good to ingore the previous.

Answer 4

I don't believe there's a creator. If you read "A New Kind of Science"by Stephen Wolfram" or read a review, since it's a very long book, you'll see that some very simple rules can give rise to some very complex objects. Cellular automata, the Mandelbrot Set, Julia sets can all have unlimited complexity but the rules for creating them can be summed up in a few lines. Something from nothing? If the gravitational binding energy of the Universe, which is negative, almost exactly balances the mass and energy content of the Universe, then the Universe is a free lunch. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle says that virtual particles can pop in and out of existence without cause. How come conditions are just right for complex life forms like us? Well, maybe our universe is one of many, all with different physical laws. Only the minority with just the right conditions have people like you and me arguing about god. It seems to me that religions like christianity are a crude attempt by ignorant people to come up with some easy answers to difficult questions. The Middle East, where Judaism, Christianity and Islam originated, and 18th century America where Mormonism originated, were very primitive places. Some religions teach that man was made in the image of god. I maintain it was the other way round. Vindictive, jealous judgemental people invent vindictive, jealous judgemental gods, and nice people invent merciful gods. But nice people can't explain why a nice god has made such a nasty world. A loving father doesn't just look on while his children torture and kill each other. And if you read Ray Kurzweil's books, you'll see that soon we'll have such advanced technology that we'll be able to create machines with far greater than human intelligence.

Answer 5

The ancient man could not think of anythg happening without an agent -somebody doing it ./ causing it .the fact of indestructiblitlity of mater was unknown and unbelivable to the ancient man.He belived in what all he saw with his naked eye and belived in illusions .He and wvwn now we also see that the blue sky is far too high over our head wherever we might be and tha it curves down and touches the horizan and so it is like a doom / a vault over the earth. The rublings of the thunder was like the sounds of the wheels of some chariots running above the vault -the sky.the ancient men were not as intelligent as the modern men in many areas of knwoledge and this hardly anybody could deny. When we say this , we do not say that all of them were ignoramuses.thre should have a been a few exceptionally smart and intelligent men also and they form an exception and that does not mean that the ancient men were all generally intelligent. they felt that the natural calamities like the storms , floods , tsuami . heavy down pour of rain , thunder and lighting wee caused by the gods living over the blue vault , the sky . This is because they were unaware of the nature of things and that they had a firms belief that anything destructive could only be made by living men or men more powerful than men only.This thought has been infused in the minds of all men from childhood and from generation to generation for million of years and so such a though has come to stay in the brain of men as the software of the basis operating system of the brain .This is brainwashing of the humans for millions of years and it is very difficult to shake off such ideas from the brains of humkans . The fact that the earth and the celestial bodies are in a position fo suspension in the space is something that the human mind can not even imagine and it can not believe that some thing even as light as a feather could remain is suspension without any support .So also the human be rain can not really belive in the indestructiblity of matter and that anything that can not bve destroyed can not and need not be created . it is because of this reason , it always thinks that somebody should necessarily have created this universe .it is unfortunate that the human brain even of the most and highly educated can not free itself from the viruses that have been installed in the hard disc of its brain and is nto able to see the facts proved by science and does not understand eben science .Science is not creating anything new in this universe , It only finds the cause and the action and the phenomena of nature and enables us to harness the forces of nature for our convenience devising new contrivances . Science is the door that opens up the dark secrets of nature to our vision and unravels the secrets and wonders of nature and enables us to understand what the qualities and character of the natural forces are .the men who have not understood nature are equally ignortant of the charcter of science and is inimaical to it thinkjing that it is inimical to the knowledge they already have as sicnce proves it to be false and worng. the ignoant man is huret when science proves his ancient knowledge wrong . The universe did not have a createor as such a creator would have to foind a place other than the universe for his existnece and stay , if there were such a person..The whole unverse is one entity such as a man is one individual despite his having so many organs inside and oput side for so many different uses . it is just like he wheels of a clock . No individual wheel constittue the clock and every wheel is part of it and the clock itself won't function and would not be a clock if some single wheel does nt function. If one were beliee in God , he shoud be belive the entire universe as God instead oif searching for the nonexistant one as the creator of the unverse that is made of mater that could never have been created as proved by its character of not being destructible .Ths poroves that that there could never be creator for the universe and the univese itself is made of the most powerful and indestructible wonderful matter which makes and unmakes everything in it incessantly.That is by itself God if any one desperately needs a God .
]

Answer 6

The big bang created the universe. COBE maps the early universe better than we could have ever imagined. It make the early universe, show the early formation of the universe. We don't have to look far that there was no god. Nature will continue long after we are gone.

But to think we are unique in the universe only reveals our arrogance. Ig god existed he did not need to create a universe, a simple solar system would have been enough.

Answer 7

I love atheistic evolutionists....they bury themselves every time they hit that point where nothing created everything!

They think they have proved religion wrong by saying, "Well, then, who created God?"

The easy answer is NOONE. Now its your turn.......(just kidding)

While theistic evolution is a possibility (and I would not argue with a strong possibility (*** opposed to early creationism)), atheistic evolution is sheer lunacy, hatched from the minds of those who think they are at the top of the Universe and nothing could have possibly created them.

The very definition of God is that he "IS." He has no
beginning and no end(especially in the time
constraints that you are thinking of). Atheist
scientists (as opposed to those who believe in God...not that all scientists are atheists) tell you that you must have scientific
proof to prove anything. They will tell you that Faith
is not proof and they will say this to their deaths.
Yet they simply say in passing that 'Matter was just
there' It created itself. THAT IS ILLOGICAL LUNACY.
Talk about faith...that requires a million times more
faith than faith in God.

These scientists trace the physical. They tell you
that the UNBREAKABLE law of conservation of matter and
momentum MUST HOLD. The Universe has laws that have never been broken. They trace the universe all the way back to
a rock and then tell you that the rock created itself. (Or some fictional creature called "Big Bang"....which sounds a lot like God being that this thing created everything)
C'mon...SERIOUSLY...you cannot possibly buy this.

GOD is outside of time, space, matter. He created the
physical, he created matter and momentum, he created
time and seasons, he created our miniscule brains with
a snap of his fingers.

Think about it in terms of dimensions. If you are a
dot on a chalkboard in 2-dimensions and someone(God)
draws a square on that chalkboard. What does the dot
see? The dot(us humans) see a line. We KNOW it's a
line (because of the laws of our nature). Noone could convince us otherwise. We are right (in our perspective) But we are also DEAD WRONG. Its not a line...its a square. Now think of
the chalkboard as time. Where is God standing in
relation to time??? He is not constrained by
time...he created our human "time" God is a spiritual creature, not a physical one.

If the physical world(with time and space barriers) is
traced back using the only available physical
properties of that dimension (especially one like time), it comes to a point
where the physical cannot explain any further. The
SUPERNATURAL (above natural law) HAS to be the answer.
You cannot logically argue against this point, until
the day scientists observe the law of conservation of
matter and momentum being defied.

MATTER CANNOT CREATE MATTER. NOTHING CANNOT CREATE
MOMENTUM. GOD DOES NOT NEED A BEGINNING IN OUR TIME BECAUSE HE IS
OUTSIDE OF TIME. YOU CANNOT REBUT WITH WHO CREATED
GOD. HE(being the unexplainable or at least outside
of our laws) IS THE END OF THE ARGUEMENT The
arguement is that something above nature must have
created nature, whether you call him God or Allah or Peekaboo, or Sinbad(because by nature's laws, nature cannot
create itself). Something supernatural....something
that is outside of our dimensional constraints is needed in order to create our dimension.
Scientists have no other arguement but to say nothing
created eveything. At least tell me that it could
have been 9 or 10 or 1 "gods" that created
everything....BUT IT CANNOT BE NOTHING CREATED
EVERYTHING. If you believe that its because you want to, not because you are convinced by your reason.

Answer 8

This isn't really an astronomy & space topic.

Science doesn't have anything to say about why reality exists.

It does, however, have something to say about the evolution of the Universe once it came into existence (however that happend, creator or not).

Answer 9

I think the occums razor part in Contact answers that question for me. In it they said man made
" god " ( eyeroll) up so he won't feel so small and alone .

Jodie Foster 's character Ellie Arroway had it so right .

Answer 10

If there is a creator, who created the creator? We graduatally evolved thru the milleniums to what we are now, and are still evolving.