how do atheists explain this?
How do atheists explain this?
Other urls found in this thread:
Water + much cold = snowflake
Easy enough religious faggot?
...
beyond the shitty argument, snowflakes are cool
The crystalline structure of ice is six-fold (look it up if you don't know what it means). This is what give the initial snowflake 6 arms. As the snowflake falls, the arms of the snowflake grow according to differences in temperature and pressure and since each arm experiences virtually the same temperatures and pressures at the same time, the arms grow in extremely similar patterns which give the snowflake its (near) symmetry. Snowflakes are not actually completely symmetrical, just often quite close to being so.
How are snowflakes connected with atheism ?
Because they're pretty therefore cannot be explained apparently.
i doubt actual snowflake are this symmetric
also most of them are probably very ugly
i think he meant the beauty, shape cant be coincidence
with science
How do atheists explain consciousness?
(Star Wars Galactic Empire theme song starts playing)
It's an example of intelligent design
>Because they're pretty therefore cannot be explained
amidoingitrite?
they say it's just the advanced human brain finding patterns and creating a self in order to succeed. utter bullshit.
>t. 300 lb Fedora lord
Well its not coincidence. Its physics there is no mystery about it. But why do atheist have to explain anything ? Atheism is not offering any explanations.
Atheism is a phase. Just leave them alone.
im a christian but okay
Its not a design. Its a natural effect.
>Its physics there is no mystery about it
This is what atheists actually believe
>Atheism is not offering any explanations.
This is why I'm Muslim. I get all the explanations and as a bonus i get virgins to shag.
Wow such thinking skills OP. Something most christians don't have.
I doubt there's anything "natural" about snowflakes
Snowflake shape can be influenced by intention.
...
natural effect can easily be called design
not that i agree with OP, im just entertaining his side
Everything you see is natural. As it came out of nature.
>But why do atheist have to explain anything ?
For starters you can explain why you positively believe there is no God.
Atheism is not merely the lack of belief in God, which is what they shrewdly claim, but rather the positive affirmation of a lack of God. Therefore they must provide proof if they want their scientific claim to be accepted.
Design implies intent. A natural effect has no Intention.
thermodynamics
>retards actually believe this
they are cubes
Day of the science coming soon christcucks.
>atheists explain this?
109.5 deg bonding angle and relatively high electro-negativity of water molecules
>designed by God ofc
Fuck off. All of you religious nutjobs are all the same, when you can't find an explanation then it must be god. You're so fucking retarded, stupid, ugly and pathetic. Sometimes there is no explanation, it's the miracle of life you ugly, sweaty spastik.
>muh virgins
Kys
Well thats not what atheism is. You are refering to gnostic atheism. I dont believe in a god as i was not predented convincing evidence. However i do not know if there is a god or not.
No it is lack of belief at the current time.
I don't believe in Unicorns or flying pigs. If I looked out the window tomorrow and saw a load of pigs flying past of course I'd change my mind.
Whereas you say no I don't believe in flying pigs because there is no evidence but I believe in god despite there being no evidence except muh fee fees.
Did matter come from nature?
Did the laws of physics come from nature
Here's a good one for you folks.
Define "natural".
Maybe.
...
What a shitty false flag and false analogy. Snowflakes are nowhere near as complex as even single-celled organisms.
can you naturally create matter then?
/thread
Sage
>I don't believe in Unicorns or flying pigs
And yet to say that they positively do not exist, you would need evidence.
Atheism is the explicit proposition that God certainly does not exist.
There's already a word for simply not believing, and that's agnosticism.
Valence electrons and hydrogen and oxygen having similarly weak bonds.
Only by pulling from something else.
Good argument
>mass is energy
>total energy constantly becomes entropic
Atheists explain how we're still here after billions of years of entropy from a singularity.
Everything in the world is natural. It is all part of nature.
equal and opposite reaction
How do Christians explain this?
ITT: olympic mental gymnastic by atheists
>Atheism couldn't singlehandedly-destroy Christianity in a week
TOP KEK CHRISTIAN PIG SHIT!!! Oh believe you me, us Atheists are ITCHING for a war with Christianity. We will fucking ANNIHILATE your dirty religion. There wouldn't be a square meter of any Christian church that has running water, electricity, or petrol that isn't on fire, once our airforce and navy is done bombarding your defenseless country. Then, our army boys (we'd send the obese fedora fags and other losers first) would swoop in, raping your women, and killing EVERY Christian pig shit they see. When Atheism's done with you, we will have committed acts of genocide. Of course no one is gonna do shit about it
ow oof my atheism
mspaint
Crystalline structures.
I juat googled there is virtual particles plopping in and out of existence constantly so it might be possible there is a natural process that creates matter. However i am not a physicist. You should ask one that specializes in that.
Science, bitch!
>Atheism is the explicit proposition that God certainly does not exist.
no its not.
I've sometimes wondered if symmetry actually exists in nature.
The Jewish magic that binds everything together hence the "natural" star you posted.
I wish these movies would be timescale-realistic.
But then we'd just have 2 hours of movie and only get 1 second of humans.
Agnosticism implies the idea of the existence of God is at least entertained, which is retarded for all practical purposes.
Yeah we can't disprove the existence of God, but the likelihood is so unbelievably small that I'm not gonna live my life under the assumption God might exist.
Reminder that God did all this.
ITT butt hurt christcucks stroking themselves to the delusion of their magic kike in the sky.
>he believes that god wastes his time designing each individual slowflake
If he was smart, he'd at least design an automated process that designs snowflakes by itself from environmental inputs, but at that point it's no different from "natural effect"
>tips fedora
Easy. All atheists know snowflakes come from god. Other than that god's totally fake though.
Imma go chant some bible verses backwards now. Checkmate, me.
Yet there's constantly people creating artificial barriers to what is natural and not. This is why any argument where the word "natural" comes up to me is void of reason. Anything that exists is natural BECAUSE IT WOULD OTHERWISE NOT EXIST.
This is the kind of faggot that sees bismuth and thinks is some magical stone sent by god
y no science Sup Forums?
shit design btw
We're living on a magical stone made by God.
>britbong
yah nice empire FAGGOT lol
>Something is pretty therefore God is real
I guess rainbows prove god exists too.
Why is pole over run with religicucks? They are the stupidest monkeys of all.
wtf I believe in god now
word
>god shapes each snowflake to be unique and that means he's real
>god gives children cancer and sends them to eternal punishment if they aren't Christian for whichever reason
Save me from my christcuckery by answering with science:
>entropy increases
>y no1 talks to me
Fuck talking about religion, let's post pretty rocks.
>He actually believes God hand-crafts snowflakes
kek, even most Christians are smarter than this.
fractals bro
Why don't you go to /sci/? None of what you're asking is political.
Sup Forums IQ really shining today
fuckin bismuth how does it work?
(((god))) did this
Jesus, I'll answer you, just calm your tits.
The entropy of the universe (or any closed system) is increasing. However the Earth is not a closed system. Notably, it is constantly receiving energy from the Sun. Under these circumstances, it is perfectly reasonable for entropy to decrease, as long as entropy increases somewhere else in the closed system to compensate for it. This is accounted for by the Earth radiating in infrared, which has far less energy per photon, and therefore far more photons, than the visible solar radiation. As the number of photons increases, so does the entropy. thus, the entropy of the universe still increases, even with biological order arising on Earth.
I didn't say earth. How does the entropy increase (energy becomes chaotic and unusable for the super-smart Aryans) since the "big bang" to produce a continually growing universe. Life on earth expands rapidly, but so are stars multiplying.
Math.
What the fuck are you talking about? Science can't prove the non existence of anything it's never been an research to prove something does not exist, that's not what science is about. Science explain the phenomena which is everything that surrounds you everyday, that's why science in first place does not contemplate the existence of god, cause it is not a phenomena or does not have a pattern nor any logic behavior you can study at all
ok, ok, i'll bite
1st problem is "entropy" is not a "disorder", but i guess you know that.
2nd problem here is the word "Universe". Entropy of Universe always increases, but it's not forbidden for it to stay the same or even decrease locally, within the bounds of thermodynamic system.
3rd problem is that particles lose/gain energy only when they are hit by other particles. So expect no "constant" increase.
The more important question should be "how to we even exist in the first place." The universe has a cause. Everything that exists has a cause. The purpose of living is not to simply "live." To say that is a logical fallacy. It is also a logical fallacy to say that everything exists simply to "exist" or nothing has a purpose.
EVERYTHING has a cause and a reason.
>entropy increase (energy becomes chaotic
Yeah, i see now why you've got no (You)'s earlier
Entropic stasis is only theoretical and has never been observed in nature.
which logically fallacy is it
The increasing number of stars doesn't decrease entropy. In fact, it increases it.
At its most basic level entropy is really just a measure of how many different micro-states correspond to a given macrostate. So, if there are lots of stars, there are lots of ways you could move them or switch them without really changing the macrostate at all.