If you cannot be civilized with your answer please do not answer. I believe in science (I am also a believer) and the info on the above web site makes sense to me, what do you think of it?
http://godsciencemanifesto.com/pages/scientific_proof_god.html
(sorry i didnt realize the address is not complete)
2007-02-27 07:19:21 · 12 answers · asked by Corina B 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I don't know what to believe, but two points will do nicely for now.
2007-02-27 07:26:00 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pseudo scientists are seldom THIS poorly informed:
"Darwin's theory of evolution claims that the first living cell was accidentally created from just the right, random combination of ingredients over millions of years,"
The first life form was not a cell, it was a simpler reproducing protein. This is something every high school graduate should know. Perhaps people wishing to refute evolution should at least get a G.E.D.
"In 1973, an astrophysicist and cosmologist by the name of Brandon Carter developed a theory called the Anthropic Principle"
Richard Dawkins nicely refutes this in the God Delusion.
I skimmed through the "phenomena" sections, noticed that the author apparently misunderstands even the word "phenomena" and gave up on the rest of the article.
2007-02-27 15:25:33 · answer #2 · answered by Contemplative Monkey 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Another site trying to explain creation. Explaining how the universe was created and how we humans got here are the hardest questions of all. But that said, what if the hardest questions had the most simple answers. Couldn't it be that the universe has always been, simple as that.
btw, that looked like a propaganda site trying to pack god and science into the same theory.
2007-02-27 15:27:40 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
My opinion is that these ideas are non-sequiter logic. It's like saying that the icecube is square, and since only a square icecube tray could create it, God did it. Not so. Life is formed by the universe. Life fits the conditions of the universe because this is how the universe is. Next you'll be telling me what a fantastic engineering feat it was to get all the rivers to run precicely along state borders. WOW!
2007-02-27 15:31:23 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
As a "believer" it does not necessarily prove God. Just because (a) is not true does not make (b) true. It may give us a strong correlation.
What is even more important is that it definitely can not prove that the Bible and the God in it are true.
As a believer you should know that spiritual things are spiritually discerned, that all knowledge and wisdom are hidden in Christ, that the Gospel is foolishness to those who are perishing.
I could go on, but ultimately faith can not be produced by evidence, but by hearing the Word of God (See Romans).
2007-02-27 15:25:44 · answer #5 · answered by Solafide55 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That and the scientific theory of evolution doesn't explain how the first life form came around. Creationists need to lay off the fallacies.
Edit: The site even accuses science of saying the earth was flat, so where is the scientific data that demonstrates this? The site is crap plain and simple.
2007-02-27 15:33:55 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It uses circular logic.
Life as we know it developed in our universe and must exist under the conditions of this universe. Naturally life , as we know it, thrives under the precise conditions this universe exhibits. Coincidence has nothing to do with it. There is no proof of a god in this silly argument, only the same ID rhetoric stating that life is just too complicated to have evolved so it must have been designed. Could it be that life is just too complicated for YOU to understand so YOU must insert a god into it to make YOU feel all warm and cozy inside? FYI, 14 billion years is a VERY long time, plenty long for the evolution of life without need of a god.
2007-02-27 15:37:54 · answer #7 · answered by Murazor 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'll use one example: "Darwin's theory of evolution claims that the first living cell was accidentally created from just the right, random combination of ingredients over millions of years" (Wrong, evolution is the gradual change in A POPULATION over time)
Actually, life originated in the following steps:
- The synthesis of simple organic molecules
- The formation of polymers
- The formation of membranes and droplets
- The beginning of heredity and replication
2007-02-27 15:28:28 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
How is this proof of any God? Following your logic, nobody could ever win the lottery...
This is a typical "everythings so difficult to explain, so let's make up a fellow who created it all" type of argument.
2007-02-27 15:22:53 · answer #9 · answered by Blackacre 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am a scientist. And a skeptic. I do not "believe in" things. I form convictions on the basis of evidence.
2007-02-27 15:25:25 · answer #10 · answered by fra59e 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋