Pretty sure ignorance is close to calling someone an idiot lmao "clear sign of lack of debating skills" lol what a tool
Im exausted with this thread. Its the same questions every page. Always the same when debating with an atheist, they ask a ton of questions and belittle your belief but cant answer any in return. Its easy to be all offense and no defense in a debate.
The difference between the 'god like molecule' and god is that this molecule is not all powerful and not personal. Something eternal =/= god.
I believe this was stated before, but we shouldn't be trying to figure out how we came to be, but why we are what/who we are and how we can improve. What will finding out how we came to be be beneficial? Creating new life? I think that can be seen as destructive, and Jurrasic Park can confirm (yes, it is a movie, but the logic is pretty legit).
Full Definition of ignorance. : the state or fact of being ignorant : lack of knowledge, education, or awareness. Simple Definition of idiot : a very stupid or foolish person Me: claiming that people involving God because something is incorrectly referred to as a God Particle demonstrate a lack of education on the subject. You: calling everyone who ever referred to the term "God particle" a stupid person. If u can't see the distinction between these 2 statements than there is no proper debate possible with you... PS: calling people names (=like tool), is another clear sign of poor debating skills, it is usually an indication that they have acknowledged that they are out of their depth and that their knowledge won't win the debate, so they turn to insults make them feel better about being publicly beaten ...
Let's not bicker about debating skills, go create a thread about it if you want. Lethal, how can you say we're not meant to know? We are still quite new to modern science there is ALOT we don't know and a lot we will learn about things, and how to do things. there is no way you can back up the statement of we're never meant to know and you know it.
It might be fair to say we aren't meant to know what caused the universe as we know it to begin. Scientists have done amazing things to look back in "time" but still cannot see past a certain point (i believe it is only seconds after the "big bang" occurred). And some scientists claim we will never be able to see past that point
So I've reading up on The Dalai Lama's view of ethics in today's world... He admits that religion can't answer every problem on earth, even though he himself is religious. He also says that human rights and ethics have no scientific basis, though he has hope that science might find some at some point. He says that religions used to be able to provide a strong moral compass, but with multicultural societies and multiple religions being promoted in the same areas, they become less effective in promoting human rights due to differences of opinions among those religions. Just felt like bringing these ideas up.