Do you believe in God and why

[mauGR1]

11 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I don't think it's difficult at all. There are 2 genders, male and female, but there are many differences in how people express their sexuality ie homosexual, transexual, transvestism etc etc etc. Far as I know there is no gene for homosexuality. If I'm wrong, tell us.

Imho thoughts don't have genes. 

If one born as a woman wants to behave like a man, or the opposite,  it's not a problem of mine.

Accepting different opinions, as long as they don't damage the community, is among the basic principles of cohabitation. 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

16 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Imho thoughts don't have genes. 

If one born as a woman wants to behave like a man, or the opposite,  it's not a problem of mine.

Accepting different opinions, as long as they don't damage the community, is among the basic principles of cohabitation. 

 

Likewise. I had no problems with ladyboys, so long as they didn't try to pick my pocket. Live and let live is my motto.

[ivor bigun]

23 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Sooooo, if one doesn't believe that God created the universe, what explanation does one have for the existence of all the matter that makes the universe exist. Where did it come from?

Odin? or any number of Gods that other people worship,they to believe that their God is the only God.

[ivor bigun]

11 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Likewise. I had no problems with ladyboys, so long as they didn't try to pick my pocket. Live and let live is my motto.

Or try to put their willy up my bottom, then i to have no problem ,especially as i have a gay cousin a lesbian cousin ,and a niece who is "married" to a  much older lady.

Gay people can live as they please ,just as long as they dont go on and on about how normal it is and they should be able to adopt kids , 

[thaibeachlovers]

3 minutes ago, ivor bigun said:

Or try to put their willy up my bottom, then i to have no problem ,especially as i have a gay cousin a lesbian cousin ,and a niece who is "married" to a  much older lady.

Gay people can live as they please ,just as long as they dont go on and on about how normal it is and they should be able to adopt kids , 

If I can't adopt as a single man, I don't understand how 2 males or 2 females can adopt. That's just so wrong, IMO. Children need a father and a mother to develop normally IMO.

[Surelynot]

23 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Sooooo, if one doesn't believe that God created the universe, what explanation does one have for the existence of all the matter that makes the universe exist. Where did it come from?

Fairies, elves, tiny spinning Victorian teapots.....take your pick......just as valid as God or a god.

[mauGR1]

6 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

Fairies, elves, tiny spinning Victorian teapots.....take your pick......just as valid as God or a god.

 

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, Surelynot said:

Fairies, elves, tiny spinning Victorian teapots.....take your pick......just as valid as God or a god.

No one is claiming fairies and elves created life the universe and everything.

You appear to be trolling.

[Surelynot]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

No one is claiming fairies and elves created life the universe and everything.

You appear to be trolling.

I am going with Fairies...and I hope you are not going to dis' my beliefs!

[yodsak]

On 4/19/2021 at 12:50 PM, thaibeachlovers said:

Sooooo, if one doesn't believe that God created the universe, what explanation does one have for the existence of all the matter that makes the universe exist. Where did it come from?

 It's been explained before. Quick recap. All the matter in the universe erupted from a singularity –which isn’t nothing. When the universe was just 10^-34 of a second or so old  it experienced an incredible burst of expansion known as inflation, in which space itself expanded faster than the speed of light. During this period, the universe doubled in size at least 90 times, going from subatomic-sized to golf-ball-sized almost instantaneously.

 

In the first moments after the Big Bang, the universe was extremely hot and dense. As the universe cooled, conditions became just right to give rise to the building blocks of matter – the quarks and electrons of which we are all made. A few millionths of a second after the BB, quarks aggregated to produce protons and neutrons. Within about 3 minutes, these protons and neutrons combined into hydrogen nuclei.  It took 380,000 years for electrons to be trapped in orbits around nuclei, forming the first atoms. The first stars formed from clouds of gas around 150–200 million years after the BB. Heavier atoms such as carbon, oxygen and iron, have since been continuously produced in the hearts of stars and catapulted throughout the universe in spectacular stellar explosions called supernovae.

[mauGR1]

9 hours ago, yodsak said:

 It's been explained before. Quick recap. All the matter in the universe erupted from a singularity –which isn’t nothing. When the universe was just 10^-34 of a second or so old  it experienced an incredible burst of expansion known as inflation, in which space itself expanded faster than the speed of light. During this period, the universe doubled in size at least 90 times, going from subatomic-sized to golf-ball-sized almost instantaneously.

 

In the first moments after the Big Bang, the universe was extremely hot and dense. As the universe cooled, conditions became just right to give rise to the building blocks of matter – the quarks and electrons of which we are all made. A few millionths of a second after the BB, quarks aggregated to produce protons and neutrons. Within about 3 minutes, these protons and neutrons combined into hydrogen nuclei.  It took 380,000 years for electrons to be trapped in orbits around nuclei, forming the first atoms. The first stars formed from clouds of gas around 150–200 million years after the BB. Heavier atoms such as carbon, oxygen and iron, have since been continuously produced in the hearts of stars and catapulted throughout the universe in spectacular stellar explosions called supernovae.

That's a very nice story, and surely there must be some hard work behind it , but how can you prove that it's true ?

Or should we believe it on the basis of some scientist's reputation ?

[Fat is a type of crazy]

7 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

That's a very nice story, and surely there must be some hard work behind it , but how can you prove that it's true ?

Or should we believe it on the basis of some scientist's reputation ?

Makes more sense than fairies. Long cut short as you know it is not that a scientist tells a story and we may believe based on his previous reputation..they can actually show through the astronomical data..it's fascinating how the further away the stars are it's literally looking at the history of the universe so they can work out what happened and what is happening e.g. the acceleration of the expanding universe. It's cool the way they can show the acceleration of expansion but don't know what the dark matter is that is causing it. Science can humble you in your lack of knowledge rather than make you feel arrogant that you know everything. 

[mauGR1]

14 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

Makes more sense than fairies. Long cut short as you know it is not that a scientist tells a story and we may believe based on his previous reputation..they can actually show through the astronomical data..it's fascinating how the further away the stars are it's literally looking at the history of the universe so they can work out what happened and what is happening e.g. the acceleration of the expanding universe. It's cool the way they can show the acceleration of expansion but don't know what the dark matter is that is causing it. Science can humble you in your lack of knowledge rather than make you feel arrogant that you know everything. 

I respect your opinions, the honest researchers are worth some praise indeed, but give it some time,  and some other researchers will come out with other theories and more sophisticated explanations. 

Imho, scientists can be as arrogant as anyone else, they are humans after all.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 4/20/2021 at 6:48 PM, Surelynot said:

I am going with Fairies...and I hope you are not going to dis' my beliefs!

If you are just going to troll don't expect to be taken seriously.

[thaibeachlovers]

14 hours ago, yodsak said:

 It's been explained before. Quick recap. All the matter in the universe erupted from a singularity –which isn’t nothing. When the universe was just 10^-34 of a second or so old  it experienced an incredible burst of expansion known as inflation, in which space itself expanded faster than the speed of light. During this period, the universe doubled in size at least 90 times, going from subatomic-sized to golf-ball-sized almost instantaneously.

 

In the first moments after the Big Bang, the universe was extremely hot and dense. As the universe cooled, conditions became just right to give rise to the building blocks of matter – the quarks and electrons of which we are all made. A few millionths of a second after the BB, quarks aggregated to produce protons and neutrons. Within about 3 minutes, these protons and neutrons combined into hydrogen nuclei.  It took 380,000 years for electrons to be trapped in orbits around nuclei, forming the first atoms. The first stars formed from clouds of gas around 150–200 million years after the BB. Heavier atoms such as carbon, oxygen and iron, have since been continuously produced in the hearts of stars and catapulted throughout the universe in spectacular stellar explosions called supernovae.

You omit to give an explanation as to how the big bang was created. I do believe in the big bang theory, and I also believe God created it.

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

Makes more sense than fairies. Long cut short as you know it is not that a scientist tells a story and we may believe based on his previous reputation..they can actually show through the astronomical data..it's fascinating how the further away the stars are it's literally looking at the history of the universe so they can work out what happened and what is happening e.g. the acceleration of the expanding universe. It's cool the way they can show the acceleration of expansion but don't know what the dark matter is that is causing it. Science can humble you in your lack of knowledge rather than make you feel arrogant that you know everything. 

Nothing about the big bang disproves the existence of God.

[mauGR1]

53 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Nothing about the big bang disproves the existence of God.

Agree, it must be difficult for all those materialistic folks, trying to prove that something can come out of nothing. 

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

Agree, it must be difficult for all those materialistic folks, trying to prove that something can come out of nothing. 

I'd like to see science come up with an explanation of how all the matter in the universe only existed at the instant of the big bang. Sounds like "creation" to me.

[mauGR1]

43 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I'd like to see science come up with an explanation of how all the matter in the universe only existed at the instant of the big bang. Sounds like "creation" to me.

Well, some poster said that it's better than believing in fairies,  but I'm not convinced ????

[VincentRJ]

3 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

Agree, it must be difficult for all those materialistic folks, trying to prove that something can come out of nothing. 

It seems to be even more difficult for God-believers to understand that the 'theory' of the Big Bang does not state that the universe was created from nothing. It was created from a 'Singularity' of infinite density and extreme temperature. That's not nothing. How often does this have to be stated before it sinks in? ????

[mauGR1]

4 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

It seems to be even more difficult for God-believers to understand that the 'theory' of the Big Bang does not state that the universe was created from nothing. It was created from a 'Singularity' of infinite density and extreme temperature. That's not nothing. How often does this have to be stated before it sinks in? ????

You can repeat it as long as you wish, it doesn't make it true ????

Well, unless "singularity of infinite density and extreme temperature " is another name of God. 

For how long charlatans will give science a bad name ?

[VincentRJ]

28 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

You can repeat it as long as you wish, it doesn't make it true ????

Doesn't make what true? There are two issues here.

 

(1) Does the theory of the Big Bang state that the universe was created out of nothing?
(2) Is the theory of the Big Bang, which describes the beginning of the universe, actually true?

 

I addressed issue number one in my previous post. The theory of the Big Bang does not state that the universe was created out of nothing. That's what's true.

 

Issue number two is no more than the best current theory which matches the numerous observations from Physics, Cosmology and other related disciplines. It's supported by far, far more evidence than evidence for the existence of a Creator God, but scientists do not claim with a 100% certainty that the Big Bang theory is true. There are also other scientific theories for the origins of the universe, and new theories might arise in the future as science progresses.

 

The following site provides more details, if you're interested.
https://phys.org/news/2015-12-big-theory.html
 

Edited April 21, 2021 by VincentRJ

[mauGR1]

34 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

It's supported by far, far more evidence than evidence for the existence of a Creator God, but scientists do not claim with a 100% certainty that the Big Bang theory is true.

Well, if they said they haven't got a clue,  I might actually believe it ????

[yodsak]

8 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I'd like to see science come up with an explanation of how all the matter in the universe only existed at the instant of the big bang. Sounds like "creation" to me.

The BB theory explains it. And the Higgs Boson confirms it. No need for gods. The Higgs boson is an elementary particle in the Standard Model of particle physics produced by the quantum excitation of the Higgs field, one of the fields in particle physics theory. In the Standard Model, the Higgs particle is a massive scalar boson with zero spin, no electric charge, and no colour charge. It is also very unstable, decaying into other particles almost immediately.

 

Particle colliders, detectors, and computers capable of looking for Higgs boson took more than 30 years to develop.The $5billion Large Hadron Collider is the world's largest and highest-energy particle collider and the largest machine in the world. It was built by the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) between 1998 and 2008 in collaboration with over 10,000 scientists and hundreds of universities and laboratories, as well as more than 100 countries.

 

 Inside the LHC, two particle beams travel at close to the speed of light before they are made to collide. Because Higgs boson production in a particle collision is likely to be very rare (1 in 10 billion at the LHC), and many other possible collision events can have similar decay signatures, the data of hundreds of trillions of collisions needs to be analysed and must "show the same picture" before a conclusion about the existence of the Higgs boson can be reached.

[VincentRJ]

6 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

Well, if they said they haven't got a clue,  I might actually believe it ????

 

Any scientist who said we haven't got a clue would be lying. Do you actually believe in lies? ????

 

There are many, many clues that support the theory of the Big Bang.

[yodsak]

On 4 July 2012, the discovery of a new particle with a mass between 125 and 127 GeV/c2 was announced; physicists suspected that it was the Higgs boson, also known by its nickname the “God particle’’ Peter Higgs and François Englert were awarded the Nobel Prize in physics for their work in identifying and discovering the Higgs boson.

 

Finding a Higgs-like boson validates much of how scientists believe the universe was formed. The media calls the Higgs boson the God particle because, according to the theory laid out by Scottish physicist Peter Higgs and others in 1964, it's the physical proof of an invisible, universe-wide field that gave mass to all matter right after the Big Bang, forcing particles to coalesce into stars, planets, and everything else. If the Higgs field, and Higgs boson, didn't exist, the dominant Standard Model of particle physics would be wrong.

 

"There's no understating the significance" of this discovery: says Jeffrey Kluger at TIME. "No Higgs, no mass; no mass, no you, me, or anything else…..  Taking all of those costs into consideration, the total cost of finding the Higgs boson ran about $13.25 billion'’.  

 

HTH.  The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.

[Fat is a type of crazy]

1 hour ago, yodsak said:

On 4 July 2012, the discovery of a new particle with a mass between 125 and 127 GeV/c2 was announced; physicists suspected that it was the Higgs boson, also known by its nickname the “God particle’’ Peter Higgs and François Englert were awarded the Nobel Prize in physics for their work in identifying and discovering the Higgs boson.

 

Finding a Higgs-like boson validates much of how scientists believe the universe was formed. The media calls the Higgs boson the God particle because, according to the theory laid out by Scottish physicist Peter Higgs and others in 1964, it's the physical proof of an invisible, universe-wide field that gave mass to all matter right after the Big Bang, forcing particles to coalesce into stars, planets, and everything else. If the Higgs field, and Higgs boson, didn't exist, the dominant Standard Model of particle physics would be wrong.

 

"There's no understating the significance" of this discovery: says Jeffrey Kluger at TIME. "No Higgs, no mass; no mass, no you, me, or anything else…..  Taking all of those costs into consideration, the total cost of finding the Higgs boson ran about $13.25 billion'’.  

 

HTH.  The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.

It is interesting but now believers can say - that invisible universe wide field that gave rise to all matter - god did that.

It is interesting if there is a theory on why there is anything in the first place  .. but in the end I suppose you can just keep going back as far as you can and accept that it makes just as much sense that there is something rather than nothing.

Whether there is a god or not, saying the origin is necessarily a god may give comfort, but doesn't add anything to the debate and just adds the further issue, that children even ask themselves, which is who created god. 

[thaibeachlovers]

10 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

It seems to be even more difficult for God-believers to understand that the 'theory' of the Big Bang does not state that the universe was created from nothing. It was created from a 'Singularity' of infinite density and extreme temperature. That's not nothing. How often does this have to be stated before it sinks in? ????

 

I never said the universe was created from nothing- try reading what I say more carefully. I asked where the matter ( not nothing ) that makes the universe came from, if before the universe existed there was nothing.

You still refuse to explain how such a singularity came to be. If before the singularity there was nothing, then ergo the singularity came from nothing. What science theory claims that something can come from nothing?

[thaibeachlovers]

15 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

It is interesting but now believers can say - that invisible universe wide field that gave rise to all matter - god did that.

It is interesting if there is a theory on why there is anything in the first place  .. but in the end I suppose you can just keep going back as far as you can and accept that it makes just as much sense that there is something rather than nothing.

Whether there is a god or not, saying the origin is necessarily a god may give comfort, but doesn't add anything to the debate and just adds the further issue, that children even ask themselves, which is who created god. 

Whether there is a god or not, saying the origin is necessarily a god may give comfort, but doesn't add anything to the debate and just adds the further issue, that children even ask themselves, which is who created god. 

 

Straying somewhat from the OP. The subject is do we believe in God and why. If one doesn't believe, then they can say why, without delving into the weeds.

I believe in God because of a personal experience- a road to Damascus sort of moment- so dry science isn't going to change that.

[thaibeachlovers]

9 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

It's supported by far, far more evidence than evidence for the existence of a Creator God, but scientists do not claim with a 100% certainty that the Big Bang theory is true.

Sooooooo, scientists don't know 100% how the universe was created, so ergo that would leave the possibility that God created it, even for scientists.

My belief in God has nothing to do with science, so science can't disprove God for me.