• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Questions for Atheist

anonymous9887

bible reader
If you are believe in a higher power feel free to add more questions to the thread. I want to hear what an atheist has to say on these questions. Can your prove your theories with the scientific method. please explain

Scientific method

- Ask a question

- Do research

- Construct a hypothesis

- Test with an experiment

- Analyze data and draw conclusions

- Communicate results


What is the purpose of life?

How did the atoms that created the big bang get there?

What was before the big bang theory?

If matter has always been there what caused them to react?

Can matter produce information?

How did consciousness come from matter?

What happens when we die?

Outside of radiometric dating what other methods prove millions of years?

Do theories regarding the past involve some form of assumption that the earth has always maintained the same conditions as we do today?

Can Life come from something that is not alive?

What test can be ran to prove evolution?

Do all living things have genetic information? If so, would not new information be required for the process of evolution to take place?

Because evolution requires individuals to be gaining knowledge and getting better over time, how do we explain the very intelligent individual in the past?
 

Kirran

Premium Member
I believe that some of the questions in here a relevant to you. Thank you for pointing that out.

OK well I'll take the later questions.

Do theories regarding the past involve some form of assumption that the earth has always maintained the same conditions as we do today?

No.

Can Life come from something that is not alive?

Yes. But 'living' is an arbitrary category anyway, there's no definitive line between life and non-life.

What test can be ran to prove evolution?

Observing it in the field and in the lab is good enough, combined with the genetic, ecological and fossil evidence. In that order.

Do all living things have genetic information? If so, would not new information be required for the process of evolution to take place?

Yes. Yes - it can be generated through mutation.

Because evolution requires individuals to be gaining knowledge and getting better over time, how do we explain the very intelligent individual in the past?

Because evolution is the phenomenon we observe emerging from the fact that the more offspring an individual has, the more likely it is their genetic material will be passed on to future generations. If intelligence doesn't make you have more kids, then it's not being selected for.
 

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
What is the purpose of life?
Subjective. Different people find purpose and meaning in different ways.

How did the atoms that created the big bang get there?

What was before the big bang theory?

If matter has always been there what caused them to react?
These three things are similar so I will address them together. What came before the Big Bang and how it all began is a subject of debate. There are numerous theories and ideas. If you have a genuine interest, it is worth looking into.

Can matter produce information?
I am not sure what you are asking.

How did consciousness come from matter?
Consciousness and the origin of what that even "is" is another subject of debate. There is not a clear cut definition that folks agree on across the board.

What happens when we die?
We never come back.

Outside of radiometric dating what other methods prove millions of years?
It does a pretty good job. Don't fix what isn't broken.

Do theories regarding the past involve some form of assumption that the earth has always maintained the same conditions as we do today?
No theories of the far past even come close to this conclusion. The Earth has always been in a state of flux from its origin as a lifeless rock to its state as we know it today.

Can Life come from something that is not alive?
How would you define life?

What test can be ran to prove evolution?
We are a part of that test as we speak! Isn't it exciting! :D

Because evolution requires individuals to be gaining knowledge and getting better over time, how do we explain the very intelligent individual in the past?
For the sake of argument, I assume you mean the evolution of man? In which case, you are comparing two instances that are too close together. If you compare a man from today to a man from 1900, there isn't much evolution going on there. The timeline is too short. You need to take it back further. Evolution takes a long time!
 

anonymous9887

bible reader
OK well I'll take the later questions.

Do theories regarding the past involve some form of assumption that the earth has always maintained the same conditions as we do today?

No.

Can Life come from something that is not alive?

Yes. But 'living' is an arbitrary category anyway, there's no definitive line between life and non-life.

What test can be ran to prove evolution?

Observing it in the field and in the lab is good enough, combined with the genetic, ecological and fossil evidence. In that order.

Do all living things have genetic information? If so, would not new information be required for the process of evolution to take place?

Yes. Yes - it can be generated through mutation.

Because evolution requires individuals to be gaining knowledge and getting better over time, how do we explain the very intelligent individual in the past?

Because evolution is the phenomenon we observe emerging from the fact that the more offspring an individual has, the more likely it is their genetic material will be passed on to future generations. If intelligence doesn't make you have more kids, then it's not being selected for.
1. So you are saying that for certain we know the exact conditions the world was in 5000 years ago with precision?
2. What evidence would you provide to prove that life comes from something that is not alive(according to your definition of alive)?
3. So you believe that we in the present can observe the world today and determine what happened millions of years ago? Would that theory not necessitate that the conditions prior to our current period be exactly the same in order to make that kind of assumption?
 

Kuzcotopia

If you can read this, you are as lucky as I am.
I would like to see if what I wrote will grab the attention of the people, so that they can comment on all or 1 question. I have done this before.

You didn't really read the link.

So you've done this before? Try doing it this time with some intellectual honestly and you may get an actual discussion.
 

Kirran

Premium Member
1. So you are saying that for certain we know the exact conditions the world was in 5000 years ago with precision?
2. What evidence would you provide to prove that life comes from something that is not alive(according to your definition of alive)?
3. So you believe that we in the present can observe the world today and determine what happened millions of years ago? Would that theory not necessitate that the conditions prior to our current period be exactly the same in order to make that kind of assumption?

1) 5000 years is very little time in geological terms. So we have a pretty good idea.
2) The fact that there is evidence of life existing from 4 billion years ago onwards, and not before. And also substantial evidence for the emergence of organic molecules necessary for life to emerge from inorganic processes. In the lab, we've had substantial progress in the creation of life from non-organic chemical processes.
3) Yeah, in general terms. No, why would it?
 

anonymous9887

bible reader
Subjective. Different people find purpose and meaning in different ways.


These three things are similar so I will address them together. What came before the Big Bang and how it all began is a subject of debate. There are numerous theories and ideas. If you have a genuine interest, it is worth looking into.


I am not sure what you are asking.


Consciousness and the origin of what that even "is" is another subject of debate. There is not a clear cut definition that folks agree on across the board.


We never come back.


It does a pretty good job. Don't fix what isn't broken.


No theories of the far past even come close to this conclusion. The Earth has always been in a state of flux from its origin as a lifeless rock to its state as we know it today.


How would you define life?


We are a part of that test as we speak! Isn't it exciting! :D


For the sake of argument, I assume you mean the evolution of man? In which case, you are comparing two instances that are too close together. If you compare a man from today to a man from 1900, there isn't much evolution going on there. The timeline is too short. You need to take it back further. Evolution takes a long time!
What evidence supports your claim that radiometric dating is accurate, and up to how many years does it remain an accurate method?
What evidence would you provide that the earth has always been in a state of flux since we weren't there?
 

anonymous9887

bible reader
1) 5000 years is very little time in geological terms. So we have a pretty good idea.
2) The fact that there is evidence of life existing from 4 billion years ago onwards, and not before. And also substantial evidence for the emergence of organic molecules necessary for life to emerge from inorganic processes. In the lab, we've had substantial progress in the creation of life from non-organic chemical processes.
3) Yeah, in general terms. No, why would it?
1. Is a pretty good Idea a yes or a no as far as 100% precision goes?
3. If we are observing the world today under the current conditions we have today how can we possibly make an assumption that the earth was the same throughout time, if it were any different wouldn't our observations be inaccurate. For example do we know exactly how an ice age affected the earth in all aspects? Just as an example.
 

Kirran

Premium Member
1. Is a pretty good Idea a yes or a no as far as 100% precision goes?
3. If we are observing the world today under the current conditions we have today how can we possibly make an assumption that the earth was the same throughout time, if it were any different wouldn't our observations be inaccurate. For example do we know exactly how an ice age affected the earth in all aspects? Just as an example.

1) Precision, or accuracy? We have very good accuracy and a decent level of precision, although certainly not 100%.
3) So the human world wasn't the same 2000 years ago as it was today, but we still trust that historians' findings is basically accurate.
 

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
What evidence supports your claim that radiometric dating is accurate, and up to how many years does it remain an accurate method?
What evidence would you provide that the earth has always been in a state of flux since we weren't there?
This is a loaded question with a lot to talk about. I could sit here and try to type it all out for you, but I wouldn't do it justice because I am not an expert. I would probably miss a few things. Here are some resources to get you started.

History of the Earth - This is an overview and introduces some of the different concepts, technologies and techniques that were used to date different periods on earth. This will help address how we know different things about the Earth even though we were not around.

Geologic Time Scale - This is a break down of the various eons, eras and periods that we have gone through.

Radiometric Dating - Here we begin to open the discussion regarding how we figure out just how old different objects are. Many of your questions related to the dating of objects can probably be answered here.
 

anonymous9887

bible reader
1) Precision, or accuracy? We have very good accuracy and a decent level of precision, although certainly not 100%.
3) So the human world wasn't the same 2000 years ago as it was today, but we still trust that historians' findings is basically accurate.
3)We are talking about climate change and things of that nature. Honestly I would put into question some of the dates, because can someone with 100% conviction say exactly when something was written or built and be for certain correct?
 

anonymous9887

bible reader
This is a loaded question with a lot to talk about. I could sit here and try to type it all out for you, but I wouldn't do it justice because I am not an expert. I would probably miss a few things. Here are some resources to get you started.

History of the Earth - This is an overview and introduces some of the different concepts, technologies and techniques that were used to date different periods on earth. This will help address how we know different things about the Earth even though we were not around.

Geologic Time Scale - This is a break down of the various eons, eras and periods that we have gone through.

Radiometric Dating - Here we begin to open the discussion regarding how we figure out just how old different objects are. Many of your questions related to the dating of objects can probably be answered here.
ok thanks. I will check it out.
 
Top