For the love of god, can someone explain who created god?

[Apologetics]

Nope, sorry, we don't. If you want to claim it is "intelligent" the burden of proof is upon you. Creationists make this claim but never can seem to be able to support it.



You see what is not there. If it was there you could support your claims.

Do you have anything more than handwaving? A claim that is made with a handwave can be refuted by a handwave. Once again, what is your evidence?

If you want to claim it is "intelligent" the burden of proof is upon you. You are the living proof of that evidence. That highly intelligent information made you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You still dont get it. You simply caint see.

I heard that about 90 % of or matter in our bodies comes from the empty space between the quarts,. So That is suppose to prove that matter comes from nothing right.!

Dont be so naive. Its just a theory that the space is empty. In other words our technology is not sophisticated enough to detect what is in that supposed empty space. You know before we had atom smasher where they collide atoms and see what happens when they collide. The science community was unaware of what made up a nuetron and protons until 1968. So wait awhile maybe in your life time youll hear an announcement from some science community that they discovered particles in the empty space.

I am sorry, you just did not understand that video at all. Please watch it first before making comments based upon your misunderstanding.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If you want to claim it is "intelligent" the burden of proof is upon you. You are the living proof of that evidence. That highly intelligent information made you.

Nope, try again.

This is the reason that no one takes creationists seriously. So far you have not been able to support your claims at all.

 

[ArtieE]

DNA Is packed with information. RNA reads the DNA and starts the process of producing that information . Example. The DNA contains color for skin, eyes blood ect. It has the information to properly form a complicated heart and circulatory system. It has the information to produce a immune system ect. Thats all highly intelligent information that was put thier.

How did that highly intelligent information get thier . The logical answer is from a designer/Maker.

Until you can show beyond a reasonable doubt that this designer/Maker even exists, the logical answer is chemical evolution.

 

[Apologetics]

Until you can show beyond a reasonable doubt that this designer/Maker even exists, the logical answer is chemical evolution.

Where did the chemicals come from?????

 

[Apologetics]

Nope, try again.

This is the reason that no one takes creationists seriously. So far you have not been able to support your claims at all.

You are the support and evidence of Intelligent information that came from the DNA in your body that formed all your complex biological systems. Pinch yourself you are the empirical evidence that came about by DNA information.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

You still dont get it. You simply caint see.

I heard that about 90 % of or matter in our bodies comes from the empty space between the quarts,. So That is suppose to prove that matter comes from nothing right.!

Dont be so naive. Its just a theory that the space is empty. In other words our technology is not sophisticated enough to detect what is in that supposed empty space. You know before we had atom smasher where they collide atoms and see what happens when they collide. The science community was unaware of what made up a nuetron and protons until 1968. So wait awhile maybe in your life time youll hear an announcement from some science community that they discovered particles in the empty space.

"Quarts"???? There may be up to 61 quantum fields(Standard Model) that permeates throughout spacetime. There is no such thing as empty space. Even the tiniest measurement of space is teaming with virtual particles, radiation, a measurable vacuum, quantum activity(flux and gravity), and can be weighed. Including the space between subatomic particles. By understanding the Quantum Field Theory(QFT), you would never make such statements about the most tested and most accurate of all scientific Theories. CERN and LHC would not work at all if these theories were off by even the tiniest amount. You would never even claim that actual particles exist.

An analogy would be water. It will cover the entire volume of a space, and is composed of water molecules. The water would be the quantum field, and the water molecules would be the particles making up the field. There are 3 fundamental Quantum forces(electromagnetic, strong, and weak) affecting the field. How the water molecule interact with these forces can change the water molecules to ice, or steam. In an electromagnetic field(water), electrons(water molecules) can collide with each other to produce a photon of light. Now think of these particles moving through spacetime as waves, but can also be counted as tiny particles. Now think of a sea of many quantum fields interacting with other quantum fields and quantum forces throughout spacetime. Each will produce a different kind of ripple(protons, gluons, photons, neutrons, and quarks) in spacetime. This is how matter was created. Obviously, this is an oversimplification, but it is the best I can do. Don

 

[Subduction Zone]

You are the support and evidence of Intelligent information that came from the DNA in your body that formed all your complex biological systems. Pinch yourself you are the empirical evidence that came about by DNA information.

Sorry but that is mere circular reasoning on your part at the best. It also demonstrates that you do not understand the concept of evidence.

I asked several times that you support your claims and you have not been able to. Instead your hand waving has become arm flapping. No matter how hard your argument will not fly using that technique.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Where did the chemicals come from?????

Nature.

Do you realize that the Miller-Urey experiment answered that question over 60 years ago?

Miller–Urey experiment - Wikipedia

 

[Apologetics]

"Quarts"???? There may be up to 61 quantum fields(Standard Model) that permeates throughout spacetime. There is no such thing as empty space. Even the tiniest measurement of space is teaming with virtual particles, radiation, a measurable vacuum, quantum activity(flux and gravity), and can be weighed. Including the space between subatomic particles. By understanding the Quantum Field Theory(QFT), you would never make such statements about the most tested and most accurate of all scientific Theories. CERN and LHC would not work at all if these theories were off by even the tiniest amount. You would never even claim that actual particles exist.

An analogy would be water. It will cover the entire volume of a space, and is composed of water molecules. The water would be the quantum field, and the water molecules would be the particles making up the field. There are 3 fundamental Quantum forces(electromagnetic, strong, and weak) affecting the field. How the water molecule interact with these forces can change the water molecules to ice, or steam. In an electromagnetic field(water), electrons(water molecules) can collide with each other to produce a photon of light. Now think of these particles moving through spacetime as waves, but can also be counted as tiny particles. Now think of a sea of many quantum fields interacting with other quantum fields and quantum forces throughout spacetime. Each will produce a different kind of ripple(protons, gluons, photons, neutrons, and quarks) in spacetime. This is how matter was created. Obviously, this is an oversimplification, but it is the best I can do. Don

Don Thanks for the analogy.

If the quantum fields created matter then what created the sea of quantum fields. Where did the strong /weak nuclear forces and electromagnetic forces come from .You see you could take this line of logic to infinity.

 

[Apologetics]

Nature.

Do you realize that the Miller-Urey experiment answered that question over 60 years ago?

Miller–Urey experiment - Wikipedia

Where did the """putative conditions on the primitive Earth""" come from that created the chemicals?
You see your line a reason continues to infinity. There is always something else that always proceeds the other.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Don Thanks for the analogy.

If the quantum fields created matter then what created the sea of quantum fields. Where did the strong /weak nuclear forces and electromagnetic forces come from .You see you could take this line of logic to infinity.

Why assume that something is needed to create the fields? By your "logic" if you claim that a god did it then you have the problem of who created that god, and who created the god creator, etc. and so on. At one point one must stop and simply say "This is all that we know right now". That in no way implies that a god exists. If a person wants to claim that a god exists that person must provide evidence for this god. Who knows, a god may have done it. But until reliable evidence is found for a god it is irrational to claim that a god did it. That argument has failed countless times in the past. It is more than reasonable to think that it will fail again.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Where did the """putative conditions on the primitive Earth""" come from that created the chemicals?
You see your line a reason continues to infinity. There is always something else that always proceeds the other.

Nope, it goes only so far as our current knowledge extends. Please note the conditions of the primitive Earth were based upon what was thought to be the conditions at that time. Those have changed a bit over the years. The experiment was done again with several different possible atmospheres. The chemicals still formed.

Please don't assume that others use your flawed logic. Who made the god in your beliefs? Who made the god creator? You are the one that has a belief that relies upon infinite regress, not others.

 

[Apologetics]

Why assume that something is needed to create the fields? By your "logic" if you claim that a god did it then you have the problem of who created that god, and who created the god creator, etc. and so on. At one point one must stop and simply say "This is all that we know right now". That in no way implies that a god exists. If a person wants to claim that a god exists that person must provide evidence for this god. Who knows, a god may have done it. But until reliable evidence is found for a god it is irrational to claim that a god did it. That argument has failed countless times in the past. It is more than reasonable to think that it will fail again.

It is a perplexing problem but as I posted previously, just as it is plainly obvious that there is a design to every thing we see and understand for example the computer we use has buttons on the key board that were designed to do a specific thing. Thats design. They have limitation. You cant push the on switch and expect a picture to be taken from the computer camera. It was not designed that way.

So it is with us. When we were designed we were designed with limitation. We cant flap our arms and expect to fly off into the sky. We have limitation in intelligence as well. We cant fathom terms like infinity, forever,eternal. always been.At least I caint. We always ask the question how could that be,

 

[Apologetics]

Nope, it goes only so far as our current knowledge extends. Please note the conditions of the primitive Earth were based upon what was thought to be the conditions at that time. Those have changed a bit over the years. The experiment was done again with several different possible atmospheres. The chemicals still formed.

Please don't assume that others use your flawed logic. Who made the god in your beliefs? Who made the god creator? You are the one that has a belief that relies upon infinite regress, not others.

Your statement """"several different possible atmospheres.""" The chemicals still formed. Where did the different atmospheres come from that formed the chemicals???You see your line of reasoning goes to infinity.!!!!

By the way Im having fun . I love to discuss these subject . There is nothing here personnel again you. Im just sharing my thoughts!!

 

[Subduction Zone]

It is a perplexing problem but as I posted previously, just as it is plainly obvious that there is a design to every thing we see and understand for example the computer we use has buttons on the key board that were designed to do a specific thing. Thats design. They have limitation. You cant push the on switch and expect a picture to be taken from the computer camera. It was not designed that way.

So it is with us. When we were designed we were designed with limitation. We cant flap our arms and expect to fly off into the sky. We have limitation in intelligence as well. We cant fathom terms like infinity, forever,eternal. always been.At least I caint. We always ask the question how could that be,

Once again, simply stating that something is obvious is not supporting your claims. If design was obvious there would be evidence for it. Your inability to understand how life evolved does not refute the fact that you are the product of evolution.

So, do you have anything besides arm flapping to support your claims?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Your statement """"several different possible atmospheres.""" The chemicals still formed. Where did the different atmospheres come from that formed the chemicals???You see your line of reasoning goes to infinity.!!!!

By the way Im having fun . I love to discuss these subject . There is nothing here personnel again you. Im just sharing my thoughts!!

It would help if you could ask proper questions. You know nothing of the sciences and yet you are trying to refute them. That does not work rather well. If you want to learn people here will help you. If you want to keep yourself ignorant then have fun.

 

[Apologetics]

Once again, simply stating that something is obvious is not supporting your claims. If design was obvious there would be evidence for it. Your inability to understand how life evolved does not refute the fact that you are the product of evolution.

So, do you have anything besides arm flapping to support your claims?

You dont want to accept the intrinsic evidence of information that is stored in DNA. Example. Thoughts and imagination are not physical in nature .You can not touch or hold them in your hand, but they still exist . The only physical evidence that you could submit that they exist are 2 fold. Brain waves registered on a graph of paper. Or put them in words on paper. But they do exist with out the evidence provided

So likewise The information in the DNA is intrinsic in nature. The physical evidence that the information exists is presented in the form of you. You walk, see, hear feel taste touch think and live. All because of that information that you cant see with macro vision.

 

[Apologetics]

It would help if you could ask proper questions. You know nothing of the sciences and yet you are trying to refute them. That does not work rather well. If you want to learn people here will help you. If you want to keep yourself ignorant then have fun.

You avoided a valid question. Where did the """"several different possible atmospheres.""" come from that created matter???

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

How did that highly intelligent information get thier . The logical answer is from a designer/Maker.

And when that information is bad, that makes the Maker not so intelligent, huh?

When you pass by an empty commercial lot one day. And then 6 months later you pass it again and find that it now has a building erected on it and a booming business. You immediately say wow some body built that pretty fast. What you never will ever thing or say is wow that came of its own accord out of no where. Of course you dont . Because you know thats not logical. Buildings are built by some contractor.

When you pass by an empty lot one day. And then 6 months later you find that it now has some flowers growing in the lot. You immediately say wow, that was fast. What you lack is the proof anyone planted the seeds there, accidentally or purposefully.

Also, buildings not up to code would also prove the contractor isn't all that smart.

That alone is evidence of a designer/Maker.

A dumb one?

If you want to claim it is "intelligent" the burden of proof is upon you. You are the living proof of that evidence. That highly intelligent information made you.

It also made humans born without brains, and not in the figurative sense. Missing a finger or something, I can understand, but missing the entire hard drive, as it were, seems something an Intelligent Designer wouldn't screw up.

We have limitation in intelligence as well. We cant fathom terms like infinity, forever,eternal. always been.At least I caint. We always ask the question how could that be,

THIS is the problem with arguments from complexity. What is horrendously complex to one person may be super simple for someone else and vice versa. To my dogs, opening a door is complex.