>things athiests can't explain:
why are elements with atomic # 1-2 gases, elements with atomic # 3-4 solids, then #5 a gas again, then #6 a gas again, where's the logical pattern?
why is the atom the way it is, i mean WTF WHY IS IT LIKE THAT?
why do a lot of spirals almost exactly follow the golden ratio? (pic related)
why is sulfur like that? WHY?
>the only logical answer: an influence from an independent variable known as god
explain your way out of this, atheists.
Dna is code.
Because weed lmao
atheists btfo
en.wikipedia.org
You did not even make me try hard.
...
Atheists believe in the sky fairy tale called the big bang.
The Big Bang is a proposed theory that is derived from directed observations of the universe expanding.
God is a fictional character, and the bible is more ridiculous than the story of the little mermaid
is nature a jojo reference
Kike, you LITERALLY fell for the evolution fairy tale meme. Deposit 2 shekels and proceed to an hero.
>God is a fictional character, and the bible is more ridiculous than the story of the little mermaid
more ridiculous than the entire universe just spawning from nothing?
...
Deism > Agnosticism >>>> Atheism + Theism
...
The principles of evolution are used every day by humans to breed cows that produce more milk and breed bigger fruits.
I hope you realize this
...
...
whats ridiculous about that? do you find it ridiculous because you didnt see it happen? because noone else did? or because it wasnt recorded by old jews in a special book and read to you every sunday when you were growing up?
Da joo sed so, mhst be true. The big darwin man in the sky wills it.
We do not know how the universe started because we have limited tools which are not good enough to research such a complex and difficult subject.
The big bang hypothesis is derived from observations of the universe expanding, suggesting that it was smaller in the past.
If you think any of the things i'm saying here are more ridiculous than an undetectable sky daddy that does magic, you are terrible at the process of thinking.
...
>Athiests BTFO
>labelling FREE-THINKERS "atheists" because it makes one's own brain-rotten self feel better about being jew-cut
'k
> why are elements with atomic # 1-2 gases, elements with atomic # 3-4 solids, then #5 a gas again, then #6 a gas again, where's the logical pattern?
Actually, that's explained pretty easily by orbitals/nuclear chemistry.
> why is the atom the way it is, i mean WTF WHY IS IT LIKE THAT?
Also relatively well understood (though not perfectly). Look up the strong force as one of the four fundamental forces in physics. It keeps the neutrons and protons bound together at the nucleus (despite the fact that the electromagnetic force would cause them to be repelled) and electrons in orbitals.
The idea of god is a cop out. There is no evidence there is a god plus god doesn't actually explain any of these. Sometimes you just need to admit that your don't know the answer yet (like with the golden ratio).
Deism is the answer. I love the clockmaker universe analogy.
i've always wondered about trends in the periodic table
i have a basic understanding of chemistry, but the periodic table seems really arbitrary
to what degree can we actually predict the properties of an element, given properties of previous elements?
Fucking jew.
Your link supposes the existence of a nothing.
Prove it.
There's no such thing as nothing.
All I really remember is that they're grouped for a particular reason. I don't really remember why though.
I always liked Chemistry but not to the point of wanting it to be my career.
I've seen the math on electron orbits...it makes sense...your personal lack of understanding doesn't mean god...but others understanding doesn't mean lack of a god...
You are just an idiot.
And need to take physics E&M.
Thread
How so? Keep in mind your explanation must not be possible without evolution.
GOD DAMNIT YOU FUCKING JUDEN LEARN TO MILK A COW YOUVE NEVER EVEN TOUCHED A TIT J*WBUS TOLD ME YOU ARE A SARCOPHAGUS OF SATAN
If you cared to educate yourself a little bit, stars and stripes, you wouldn't ask these retarded questions in the forst place. Your post only proves that where a human has no explanation, he puts a god.
big bang theory was proposed by a priest and doesn't really contradict shit except for some Baptist knobs and people who cant understand abstract times and dates are just that and represent time periods more so than actual dates of events
Kikes belief in god is weak ... No wonder they are called children of satan in the bible
Throw the cow in to the sea and it will turn in to a seacow? . idiot
This is a shitpost isn't it? If I answer all these questions with logic and reason I'm just going to be ignored aren't I?
I won't bother.
Black holes.
>gravity is nothing
...
Gravity isn't a physical object, you dunce.
Accretion disk, tidal forces (singularity). You think the absence of visible light is what makes something "nothing"? Is that what they teach you in Sunday school? Oh sweetie cakes oh baby honey love bug cherry gumdrop face. You have to go back (to school).
>only physical objects exist
atheist memes have always been the worst. let me guess, you're 12 and edGy.
sweet jesus
what is this?
It's like OP hasn't heard of the Schrodinger wave equation.
Latest in loli technology
...
>the periodic table seems really arbitrary
It is. It was arbitrarily constructed to lign up trends
Later on we discovered why these trends happened
>to what degree can we actually predict the properties of an element, given properties of previous elements?
Not really at all. At least directly. We predict properties from the number of electrons, but of course if you know the atomic number of an element, you know the atomic number of adjacent elements (and thus the number of electrons)
Ultimately, it's still more a case of fitting theory to reality than actually predicting properties. Not in the sense that the theory isn't legit, but it's complex. Most undergraduate students will have an intuitive understanding of how electron structure affects the properties of the elements of the first few periods, but this understanding is mainly a product of pattern recognition and knowledge of simplified quantum mechanics. It's fairly robust, but not rigorous. In the end, no qualitative "theory" can accurately predct how an element will behave. To predict that, you'd need a supercomputer to simply calculate e.g. what state of matter is favorable at room temperature
>Accretion disk
How fucking retarded are you? The accretion disk is an artifact of what happens when there is a black hole, not that it is a part of it.
>tidal forces (singularity)
The singularity is the infinitely small point in the middle of the black hole where all matter goes to. That is a lot of space in between the singularity and the event horizon where there can be nothing.
How fucking retarded are you? You're saying that a black hole is "nothing". I'm telling you and Sven is telling you that a black hole is something and yes well done on understanding what the singularity is, now tell me the black hole has nothing in it and then tell me about the singularity.
You see the problem we're having here? You get it yet? If you've gotten it by now, well done have a gold star.
>he actually think that is cp
>why are elements with atomic # 1-2 gases, elements with atomic # 3-4 solids, then #5 a gas again, then #6 a gas again, where's the logical pattern?
>why do a lot of spirals almost exactly follow the golden ratio?
So if something is has no logical pattern, it must be due to a god, and if something has a logical pattern, it must be due to a god?
The singularity isn't the only part of the black hole, you mong. You are still leaving out the event horizon and all the empty space in between it and the singularity.
Given that there is no such thing as nothing, and I agree, does that really mean God exists?
besides all of the things you are asking have been explained.
>why are elements with atomic # 1-2 gases, elements with atomic # 3-4 solids, then #5 a gas again, then #6 a gas again, where's the logical pattern
Literally fucking highschool chemistry
this is the kind of answer i was looking for, thanks mane
>michio cucku
He's not a real scientist
The point is, if our own existence is too good to be true, do we really exist? We can't even explain why we came to be. Let's just work on the future and uncover our history. GodIsReal
1: human conatruct based on atomic weight and number of protons around the nuclei
2: google fibonacci numbers or "sea shell cellular automata", these are very simple processes, basically the most simple ones you can come up with algorithmically speaking and these formations are due to ordered cellular division patterns
Literally highschool tier, atheists btfo....
Chemistry as it is taught before graduate level is mostly just descriptions. If you want the full scoop then that's in the realm of atomic, nuclear physics and quantum mechanics (quantum chem).
>ITT: two sides of the same coin
Both sides just blindly follow whatever book they believe. Jesus told Christians and some science jew told atheist. To think sentient apes have any capability to reach such comprehension on what "GOD" could mean, or why we exist is hilarious. Especially when YOU yourself haven't been there and are going off nothing but word of mouth. Shut the fuck up and go back to being cattle, you too peasant kike.
>why are elements with atomic # 1-2 gases, elements with atomic # 3-4 solids, then #5 a gas again, then #6 a gas again, where's the logical pattern?
... really?
PhD with phys org chem here and orbitals explaining why some matter is solid or gaseous not correct
they are grouped depending on how many electrons their outer layer has and their "willingness" to give it up
He's a nigger if serious about carbon being gas. The only think that needs to be gas is the jew
>why are elements with atomic # 1-2 gases, elements with atomic # 3-4 solids, then #5 a gas again, then #6 a gas again, where's the logical pattern?
What the fuck are you even talking about, Carbon atomic number 6 is a solid in most environements, lithium (#3) is so unstable that it is hard to really define the state its in as it just wants to react with the air and become a stable compound.
On top of that you cant really say carbon is a gas solid or liquid because its all dependent on external factors like temperature pressure etc, same is true for all elements.
I know this is troll as fuck but at the same time I'm not even an atheist and this is weak bait so I feel really bad for anyone that buys this shite op.
Read about Mendeleev
>And good riddance, being good and chemistry and liking chemistry are entirely separate things
Gravity is the opposite of light.
> light has no mass and has maximum speed
> gravity had maximum mass and no speed
Kinda like how you rate chicks.