Astrophysicist Robert Jastrow, a self-described agnostic, stated, "The seed of everything that has happened in the Universe was planted in that first instant; every star, every planet and every living creature in the Universe came into being as a result of events that were set in motion in the moment of the cosmic explosion...The Universe flashed into being, and we cannot find out what caused that to happen."
atheists btfo eternally
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
>cannot find out what caused that to happen.
= Space santa is real
Do atheists get tired of getting BTFO all the time?
Thinking that the universe needs a beginning when time only exists with space.
OP BTFO
A
In the beginning there was nothing... and it exploded into an infinite expansive matter...
Fucking != LOGIC
You're all so fucking dumb it hurts.
Atheists absolutely BTFO
pic related.
lol if something is perfect, ominpotent, omniscient, non physical, immutable, and eternal that means it lacks definition and therefore there is only one thing that fills that definition, nothing. You just proved that not only does god not exist, but can't possibly exist.
Trash argument desu
Nothing in existence can be fully defined
Level 65 gigavirgin detected
right otherwise it would be nothng and go back to lacking any definition. Things are defined by their relationship to other things, and what was described is completely irrelevant to anything within reality.
Complete non sequitur. More evidence as to why we need to keep women out of our institutions.
to further elaborate if something is everything(god) that means there is nothing left to define it, making it defined as nothing
>we don't know why it rains, it must be God
>we don't know why there are diseases, it must be God
>we don't know how the universe began, it must be god
You are here.
>God must have created the universe
>Nothing needs to have created God you Plebbit neckbeard atheist
People are so quick to attribute everything to god that it is becoming abit silly as technology advances.
And people fail to realise that the most intellectual and scientific answer to some questions that arise is simply : we dont know yet.
life couldn’t form from sugar, protein, water, and lightning we have all that stuff and haven’t been able to create life and the Big Bang form from literally nothing. And the single celled organisms we have found which would be like in what atheists to believe the first forms life have 8-12 chromosomes pairs and 8,000 genes. That doesn't come from lifeless sugar, protein, water, and electricity. Also then where the hell did trees come from too? Also before you say fungus/mushrooms those are more related to animals than plants.
From what I remember the first forms of life were thermalsynthesis (bottom of the ocean at thermal vents). The cell would have to solve all of these problems within it's short lifespan before it drifted too far from the heat, or got destroyed by something physically:
1: Process/digest energy.
2: Establish a barrier between self and the outside.
3: Establish- either actively or passively- some form of Homeostasis.
4: Grow and develop from it's infancy. Hence produce and develop more complex proteins.
5: Reproduce.
You can't explain all of those things in detail, that isn't even the full list. And the odds against it happening within the first 3 billion years of the planet's existence is astronomical.
Nobody understands the big bang. I heard it described as the "everywhere stretch" as the amount of space that existed today did all exist, but was smaller. Or something.
What we do know is our laws of physics break down, and nothing makes any sense. Potentially when the creator was writing/programming them?
Anyone with any experience in higher math and physics will tell you how often triangles, trigonometry and a few irrational, infinitely long and infinitely complex numbers (pi, e, square root of 2, square root of 3, 1/2 square root of 2, the convergence of the fibbonaci sequence) all come up. This is not out of coincidence.
wtf are you even going on about fedora
Here is the series of events which degenerate atheists want you to believe happened:
1) A giant explosion/expansion happened for no reason when a wave fluctuation happened and caused an imbalance between energy and negative energy (LOL) which spread countless trillions of tones of material over 90+ billion light years in diameter.
2) All of this protomatter arbitrarily separated itself in to groups for no reason, all the light gasses formed stars and all the heavier elements formed planets and rocks.
3) After several billion years of being a deadly environment which is hostile to life and amino acids, some water and lightning evolved in to amino acids in this toxic environment.
4) Over a billion years those amino acids and other stuff that impossibly formed collected together and arranged themselves in to life for no reason.
5) This DNA was bacteria and this eventually evolved in to fish.
6) Then were forced on to land or be eaten then somehow didn't dry up and die but got back into the water and did that for thousands of years.
7) The ones that survived doing this for dozens of thousands of years without dying, mated and bred with each other and grew legs and lungs.
8) Fast forward a billion years and fish evolved in to dinosaurs, and then dinosaurs evolved in to birds.
9) A few monkeys randomly got larger brains and discovered the art of making tools for the purpose of tribal warfare.
10) 200,000 years after this, tle black science man and Bill Nye the Bachelor of Engineering Guy are making TV shows while dancing around like buffoons to teach people they are stupid animals who are alive for no reason and are a collection of biological cells governed by random electrical impulses in their brains, yet they somehow are superior to Christians and have better morality, even though they change their opinions every single year and would accept Islam when their life is threatened
...
You forgot
>Brb let me evolve eyes xD
>Hey look, eyes independently evolved in all animals
>Some didn't evolve eyes because they're dumb
He contains everything, doesn't mean He is everything.
>yet
The human brain cannot conceive of reality in a comprehensive enough way to understand. Religion and science are both using language to explain phenomena we observe. Science is based on "faith" in observation, therefore it breaks down when trying to understand big picture reality. You cannot understand, you can only have faith.
Why would there be? We know the universe had a beginning.
if you think that people believe god is like a man in the sky, then you are stupid for basing your hatred on a childish incorrect perception of God.
Actually there are modern theories about what happened before the big bang based off of analysis of the radiation around its origin and its the most evidence supported theory so far that i know of.
And also All these infinite numbers you speak of, and all the ridiculous findings that we find such gluons or Higgs boson, more recently, actually prove that the scientists theories are more and more correct.
You try to talk about the universe and how it appeared through magic but you dont even have any slightest idea about what people who dont attribute everything to magic have proved and speculated based off of things we can measure.
You both really lack the perspective of time as well as how environment can influence a being.
Heres an example, it is proven that in areas of the world were there are alots of snakes that inhabit the same areas as primates to, the primates have better vision in a sense that they detect patterns way better than other primates.
So you would say that i only have faith in the computer im writing on exists but not that i can surely know that it exists?
What is the big picture you speak of?
...
...
LOL dumb christucks and their jewish pedo skydaddy with his gay zombie son
pathetic
>Pearly skin
>Freckles everywhere
Hnnng, who is the delicious semen demon?
Heyyy im an eagles fan. Where can i find this semen demon
you forgot to metion that the aggregation of the basic elements followed very strict laws.
Casually strict laws. obsv.
>Heres an example, it is proven that in areas of the world were there are alots of snakes that inhabit the same areas as primates to, the primates have better vision in a sense that they detect patterns way better than other primates.
Because they grow up being used to it. Like people that live in mountains don't need quiet as much oxygen. That's not evolution.
also
((((((((((((((((((((((((((((theories)))))))))))))))))))))))))
Then he isn't worthy of the title of god; just another creature subject to the laws of a higher power
Buck Angel
There is no higher power
It's only logical. There had to be a first cause. Whatever that cause is can be described as the creator.
Video on being an introvert
uhh and the (((creator))) of course was not in need of a 'cause' ? perfect logic
Who is the target audience for this? Why in the hell would I want to watch cs:go footage.
Aja warren is what google said, looks close enough.
A scientific theory is a much more valid speculation than a theory you come up with. If your way of dismissing a concept is putting it in brackets i dont know what to tell you.
It actually, literally is evolution however.
It is environment forcing a living being to better itself to survive.
And when you speak of oxygen, my biology teacher told me long time ago how if you were to resurrect a man from lets say 2000 years ago, he would immediately choke to death because of the CO2 emissions, but we dont. I realise you cannot make an experiment on this but its an incredibly likely speculation. Seeing as you cannot go to the top of mount everest without feeling light headed from the actual oxygen thats not polluted.
Are you willing to accept that what you are describing as a creator may be an explosion caused by a kinetic force and the law of preservation of energy?
not unless he's everything, otherwise there is something that he isn't and therfore beyond him
Sage
youtube.com
You're welcome.
Not Aja Waren, but thanks for trying to help, Serbfriend. Have a nice day.
>hey look there is a little bit of radiation from an explosion that maybe happened 13 billion years ago but there is no way to prove it and there are a lot of theories on it but mine is right with no scientific backing but remember science is important
"All houses have a builder, but he who made all things is God."
The meaning of this very simple sentence has evaded supposedly great minds in science for quite some time.
>autism in a video
>We know the universe had a beginning.
Proof please.
>It's not young Earth creationism so it's autism
>lol why is the Earth round in this video
bk2Africa, coon
How can you believe in strict empiricism when the bedrock of science (causation) is denied by the existence of the universe itself. Was the universe created (spontaneously or by God) or is the Universe constant and eternal?
Both of those options seem to deny causation. I think the most simple answer (perhaps not the correct one) is that these scientific notions of strict causation only apply to the physical world not the metaphysical world.
That's why science cannot address the existence of the universe itself- it's a METAphysical question. Not a physical one which is bound by rules of causation and logic.
Science/logic/causation is great for the physical world and the sensory world. It doesn't work so great for the metaphysical questions that our mind's sometime wander to. Stop trying to apply science to things outside its purview- you damage science by doing so.
>something that lacks definition is its fault not ours we're humans we're perfect we know everything
>i have all the best definitions everybody knows that
>spaghetti bless
>if you think that people believe god is like a man in the sky, then you are stupid
Let me fix that for you
>If you believe in g*d you are stupid
There is a fuck ton of radiation from an explosion that did happen and we have proof of the explosion.
And its not me who thought of this theory or anything, if i really need to spoon feed you links because you are too stupid to use google i dont think you should be arguing about creation of the universe on the internet. Or if you want a different perspective, i suppose you are the perfect person to argue anything on the internet, you go man.
We know what happend a second after the explosion and most of what followed it, is that not enough?
thinking everything has this lifeless definitive immutability to it, when its creation defies every theory you can try to explain it with.
This is false
haha, factually incorrect, nigger
>up until the "big bang" theory was formally adopted everybody thought the universe was infinite
>but actually it was created
I realized that most outstanding/popular atheists are either meme scientists or meme authors
>atheists btfo
>posts lewd photo that triggers my fapping addiction
Thanks faggot.
>quarks appeared out of literally no where and same with life
Huh wonder why the video didn't mention that
>We cannot know what caused that to happen
That's atheism
I won't endorse what that person was saying, but is any mainstream scientist not a "creationist" technically speaking?
I mean unless you believe the universe was constant and eternal you are essentially a creationist. To my understanding the only thing the scientists and priests are arguing about is whether the universe came into being spontaneous or at the behest of a deity. They are both basically creationists.
I would point out that both the scientist and the priest would deny causality. However the priest's worldview isn't literally based on causation. The scientist is a hypocrite in this sense and the priest is not.
Yes I know about the (((radiation))) that we found but they have literally no idea how it happened
Classical creationist argument , we can't explain it with oir knowledge now so it must be from god. Just like fire was from gods right ? Now you can buy it at the corner store. Shit argument
>We know what happend a second after the explosion and most of what followed it, is that not enough?
No.
You observe children. All children seem to be spreading outward from a common point. That common point is a schoolhouse. You have no way of knowing what happened in this schoolhouse, nor what came before these children began spreading outward from this schoolhouse. Applying Occam's Razor you come to the conclusion that children are a product of schoolhouses.
Just because you lack the means to measure occurrences on the other side of an event does not mean that event was the beginning of all occurrences.
even if God is real and created the universe, who created God?
why do autistic fedoras think that explaining the process of something proves there isn't a god?
this
So do you think the universe came into being spontaneously or do you believe it is constant and eternal?
Is there a third option which allows causation to be maintained? Humor me.
read this en.wikipedia.org
The priests worldview isn't causally based. The scientists worldview is completely based on causation.
The priest can dispense with causation- and they do. While the scientist seems to be dismissing the bedrock of their worldview. Does this occur to you?
Yeah and im saying that based off of the readings and information gathered from the radiation we can assume some things here and some things there, one of which is how our universe came to be.
Even then, just because we dont know is it god?
Is anything we dont fully understand god now?
Is the anti matter god?
Untill recently, is the higgs boson god?
You drop a nuclear bomb, and you dont see the exact milisecond of the explosion on the video, but you see the 3rd or 4th, did the nuclear explosion have no cause?
The bing bang is not a society but an explosion.
Where did this matter for the big bang come from?
What created life?
water and electricity? HA
Irrelevant
please tell how something that is perfect and eternal, never changes, is capable of thought
That how you fucks decribe god is so fucking absurdly powerfull that you reason him out of existence.
because if it's perfect then it would be able to think
This is such a dumb question
We do no it is not natural causes
>caused
>time and space
that's not how causality works
Lol
Fedoracucks are really sweating trying to conceal their asspain
>Are you willing to accept that what you are describing as a creator may be an explosion caused by a kinetic force and the law of preservation of energy?
No, because the creator would have caused that kinetic force and would have created the law of preservation of energy. What created the laws of physics? Now if you're asking if I believe God is different than the personal god of Abrahamic religions, then yes. Obviously God couldn't be described with human characteristics.
Reading the bible is like watching the kyke version of dragon ball z X10, the always right unstoppable jew. Jesus founder of the first weeb fanclub
...
why?
Well i actually cannot answer that precisely cause im not a fucking cosmologist and a physicist but alot of it has to do with interaction between quarks and gluons as well as with the fact that the universe was slowly cooling down allowing for atoms to be created.
Okay so any possible realisation the scientific community comes to based off of readings, measurements, tests you are going to simply attribute to a creator.
If scientists were to say OKAY THE UNIVERSE CAME TO BE BECAUSE X HAPPENED, youd say , yeah a creator made it happen.
So there is no point in you arguing anyone and anyone arguing with you about this.
>this level of desperate bait
the laws of physics created the laws of physics, duh. /s
God isn't physical
God doesn't exist in time
God doesn't consume energy
God created physics so he doesn't need to follow them.
Also what created the matter for the big bang to happen? nothing? fedoras don't think it's possible to break physics so some thing had to create it.
kek
wat...really...because he's god? Holy fuck stop making your fellow christfags look stupid, at least they have intelligent arguments
>Well i actually cannot answer that precisely cause im not a fucking cosmologist and a physicist
>what is the internet to look stuff up
> but alot of it has to do with interaction between quarks and gluons as well as with the fact that the universe was slowly cooling down allowing for atoms to be created.
How did it get there see
>did the nuclear explosion have no cause?
You are the one arguing the position that the explosion had no cause. You were the one assuming the universe provably had a beginning because our ability to ascribe the observable behavioral patterns of matter to that matter disappears at a certain point. In your own example this equates to saying that the observable behavior of matter originating from the center of a nuclear explosion cannot be ascribed to that matter before the moment of the explosion therefore the moment of the explosion must be the beginning of that matter. The other alternative is that an intelligent being or beings designed that explosion.
>please tell how something that is perfect and eternal, never changes, is capable of thought
How would something perfect not be able to think? You sound really fucking retarded. Especially when that thing is also all-knowing
I've asked four times and I'll ask again. As I see it there are two options:
>Universe came into being at one point and time.
>Universe has always been and is eternal.
Both of those things violate causality. So humor me... is there a third options that preserves causation?
God of the gaps is nothing but an atheist strawman. The argument is an inference to the best explanation.
Yet god needs the very physics he created (time) in order to be capable of creating anything. I said this already but time exists witin the universe not without, no beginning needed for a static universe.
Super hard right now
because thoughts are based on sequence and cause and effect, without change you can't think