One thing atheist seem to be unaware of is the law of causality. Simply put, every effect must have a clause

One thing atheist seem to be unaware of is the law of causality. Simply put, every effect must have a clause

Now let me ask you atheist, which of the following follows the law of causality?
>nothing got infinitely hot and exploded into the universe for no reason (aka big bang)
Or
>the universe was created by a being who was the capability to do so

Example 2:
>RANDOM mutations that came out of nowhere and made monkeys poop out humans
Or
>carefully designed features from an intelligent architect

Why can't atheistic theories follow the laws of the universe but God can?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_interpretation
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

What caused god to exist?

super mega god duh check mate fgt doot doot doot doot

Whats god's clause?

None
Fuck off back to Sup Forums

define "exist"

Humanity got so advanced we created a super-computer with a real world simulation thousands of years ago.

We are living in that, when we die we are freed from the simulation, and given a chance to start a 'new game'.

Now that I've invented my theory I am going to assault people with it till I'm in the ground.

>muh causality
>I've never read anything by David Hume

Define "define".

...

1. No atheist has ever said that the universe came out of nothing, it came out of a singularity
2. Mutations happen in nature all the time even today and it is constantly observed by biologists, evolution is natural selection of certain genomes over many generations

technically the vacuum energy version with a singularity isnt supported by the current data

the back ground radiation is all over the place and space pours out of space making everything move apart but the back ground radiation still doesnt seem to be 1 spot radiating out getting weaker

>it's almost 2017 and he STILL posts this ugly slut

>singularity
Aka. God

>posting that pedo image again
>implying that the big bang came from "nothing" just because we are unable to figure out what happened before it
>implying the big bang theory isn't just an idea of how our universe began and is subject to change at any time based on new information
>implying that atheism hinges on the big bang theory
>implying that god (who apparently comes from nothing and has "always existed") making the universe appear from nothing with magic is a better explanation

*Infinitely small and infinitely energetic particle which expanded to create the universe

>people still fall for this b8

WHILE YOU STICK WITH YOU ROTTEN RELIGION FROM URBAN POOR ZONES
WE, GLORIUS BELIVETS IN ATHEISM, TAKE YOU GOD POWER TO YOUSELF, AND CAN DESTROY CITYS IN 1 MINUT

BUT INVENTOR OF BIG BANG THEORY WAS A CATHOLIC PRIEST
ATHEISTKEKS BTFO

>RANDOM mutations that came out of nowhere and made monkeys poop out humans
>Or
>carefully designed features from an intelligent architect
I really don't understand how people still fail to grasp how evolution works. A monkey doesn't randomly poop out a human out of nowhere. I will use a simple example so your defective brain might be able to understand. Lactose intolerance causes IBS because adult humans (like pretty much all adult mammals) are unable to digest lactic acid. Eventually some humans domesticate animals and begin to drink their milk. Now most people could only drink small amounts of milk or they would suffer from the effects of lactose intolerance, but some humans due to random mutation weren't lactose intolerant.

Since these people who weren't lactose intolerant could drink as much milk as they wanted without ill effects they had much better chances of surviving and reproducing when food was otherwise scarce (would you really want to fuck someone constantly farting and shitting from drinking milk?) Since they reproduced they passed on their traits. Proof of this can be observed by noting the rates of lactose intolerance in different populations. Peoples who historically consumed large amounts of milk or dairy products tend to generally be able to digest lactic acid, this includes most Europeans, some people from the middle east, Turks (who migrated from the Eurasian steppes where herding was important), and India. Likewise areas without long histories of drinking milk such as South Africa and Australian Abbos have lactose intolerance rates as high as 90% with people who aren't lactose intolerance either being descended from lactose tolerant populations or simply being those handful of mutants that naturally can digest lactic acid.

FFS all of this shit is visible, dogs, chickens, horses, corn, wheat, bananas, all of this shit looked pretty fucking different from its current form before we started selectively breeding it.

SMART ATHEIST WILL NEVER SHOW IT ON PUBLIC

The reason science doesn't try to explain further back than the big bang is that it created the fabric of reality as we know it. We can't see the forest for the trees, so to speak. For all we know it could've been god but seeing as that concept is rooted in our perception of this reality it's one of the least likely options to have been an external factor in the creation of our universe.

This is a cheap kalam repackage.

Look, the laws of causation presuppose the existence of a temporal substrate.

A temporal substrate is required before a "cause" is even possible.

Your reasoning is circular. To condense your arguement:

>I assume the universe "exists" and everything that i percieve to "begin to exist" has had a perceived "cause" therefore the universe must have "began to exist"

BUT DUDE either time:

a) EXISTS which would make it part of the universe. Causation itself would require the "time" component of the universe BEFORE the universe (and therefore time) have been caused to exist MEANING the causation of time is by definition impossible.

b) DOES NOT EXIST and therefore causation is simply a mentally constructed perception of asynchronous phenomena.

Come at me.

Cause =/= purpose
Your argument is only rethorical and flawed

Okey doke

>law of causality. Simply put, every effect must have a clause
There is no such law. Stop making shit up.

The predominant contemperary interpretation of quantum mechanics assumes a non-deterministic universe, where events occur spontaneously all the time.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_interpretation

>One thing atheist seem to be unaware of is the law of causality. Simply put, every effect must have a clause

You mean how Christfaggots ignore Yin and Yang and Buddhism?
>christfags be all like WE DISCOVERED TEH THIRD LAW!
Did ye now?