why do i believe in god

Originally posted by tim88
..... in science everything must have a beginning, Scientist know that the universe was not always there! ....

Um actually no that's not true.

'Everything must have a beginning' is a finding of fact for which you need proof.

Without it it's an assumption and not a fact.

And scientists do not by any means know that the universe has not always existed.

Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
How all this disproves the existence of God ?

It doesn't disprove the existence of god.

Sonhouse was pointing out that RJHinds argument doesn't prove the existence of a god and
wasn't (as far as I can tell) claiming to be disproving god.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Um actually no that's not true.

'Everything must have a beginning' is a finding of fact for which you need proof.

Without it it's an assumption and not a fact.

And scientists do not by any means know that the universe has not always existed.

So the Big Bang theory is only a theory?

YouTube

The universe is 1 second old - (What was it 1 second before that?

Originally posted by tim88
God created the universe from nothing - in science everything must have a beginning, Scientist know that the universe was not alway there! So if the universe was created eight billion years ago? what was the first molecule that started it all? god was always there! how that is possible is beyond human understanding.

So everything must have a beginning? Answer me this: Who created God? What is his beginning?

Originally posted by tim88
So the Big Bang theory is only a theory?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDQzKTedGNE

The universe is 1 second old - (What was it 1 second before that?

The big bang is an event that really happened that may or may not have been the beginning of the universe.

However our current theories cannot see past that big bang (math breaks down when it hits the singularity).

The universe "as we know it" began with the big bang, but the universe may have existed in a different state
before the big bang... Or it might not.

We don't know.

My point is that science and scientists emphatically do not 'know' that the universe was not always there.
And that scientists do not 'know' that everything MUST have a beginning.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Well, you think "perfect eyesight, a gift of millions of years of natural selection."

And still believe there is no God. 🙄

whoo. this discussion went completely over your head. this was evident from your earlier reply, but you persist in displaying your incomprehension.

Originally posted by googlefudge
It doesn't disprove the existence of god.

Sonhouse was pointing out that RJHinds argument doesn't prove the existence of a god and
wasn't (as far as I can tell) claiming to be disproving god.

Indeed that is what I was saying. He was saying we have this jewel of a planet which we certainly do and for that reason there is a god. For reference, compare Earth to Venus, or the moon Io. The only one even close is Mars, or Titan with it's atmosphere and liquid methane lakes.

We already know of at least one other planet now, inside the goldilocks zone, where water can be liquid if there is water there. So finding that planet after roughly 500 planets found gives us a rough statistical number, one in 500 maybe like Earth. So out of literally trillions of planets out there then there are literally billions of planets that could be like earth.

The fact we have only found one so far just shows how really really large the universe is. It certainly ( at least to relatively sane people) is proven to be billions of years old and our universe may not even be the only one, there can be others, maybe trillions of other universes.

Originally posted by googlefudge
No, he thinks that we have rather imperfect eyesight after millions of years of evolution.

Can you make a post without misrepresenting the other side?

I did not misrepresent him. The portion I quoted was a direct cut and paste
from his earlier post. You are the one that has the misrepresentation. He said
nothing at all about evolution.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Indeed that is what I was saying. He was saying we have this jewel of a planet which we certainly do and for that reason there is a god. For reference, compare Earth to Venus, or the moon Io. The only one even close is Mars, or Titan with it's atmosphere and liquid methane lakes.

We already know of at least one other planet now, inside the goldilocks zo ...[text shortened]... universe may not even be the only one, there can be others, maybe trillions of other universes.

We don't know this distant planet is suitable for us to live on. It is all pure
speculation and you should have enough common sense to know that.

The big bang?

in that temperature anything could bond -?- but what in the hell could do ? such a reaction???----Nothing we know today could produce so much heat?-

Originally posted by RJHinds
We don't know this distant planet is suitable for us to live on. It is all pure
speculation and you should have enough common sense to know that.

Exactly where did I ever say that planet was suitable for earthy life? I said it showed that one in about 500 planets so far discovered outside our solar system has the possibility of having liquid water IF THERE WAS WATER THERE.

Try working on your reading comprehension skills, it will be a big help to you understanding what other people actually said rather than making grand statements.

I was pointing out finding one extra-terrestrial extra solar system planet in 500 that could have liquid water on it if water was there, was just a statistical tool that could illuminate the likelyhood for planets having liquid water and maybe life. Since we KNOW there are billions of stars in our galaxy and likely at least 5 times that number of planets, say 5 per star average, then there should be billions of planets out there and lets say one in a thousand has liquid water, then there would be millions of planets at least capable of supporting liquid water and that can lead to life.

Those numbers tell me there has to be life on other worlds, millions of earthy planets in our galaxy, think of the billions of other galaxies and tell me the possibility is zero for other Earths out there.

Originally posted by tim88
The big bang?

in that temperature anything could bond -?- but what in the hell could do ? such a reaction???----Nothing we know today could produce so much heat?-

What?

Could you try for coherence... please?

Originally posted by googlefudge
What?

Could you try for coherence... please?

From wht we know os scientific laws today, a big bang, would most likey destroy
rather than create.

Originally posted by RJHinds
From wht we know os scientific laws today, a big bang, would most likey destroy
rather than create.

Nonsense.

When we recreate the conditions just after the big bang in particle accelerators we get
huge showers of particles being created from the energy of the collisions.

Also destroy what?

Standard big bang theory doesn't have any 'before' the big bang so there and the universe
was created in the big bang.

So there was nothing (according to the standard model) to destroy.

However if there was something before it may well have been destroyed and replaced with
the universe we see today.

However the laws of physics clearly state that the big bang would create the universe we
see around us.


Contrary to what you want to believe physicists and cosmologists really care about truth and
discovering what reality is really like and if the big bang theory wasn't backed up by sooo much
evidence and didn't make such good predictions we wouldn't be using it or talking about it.

Physics works, which is why we can have this conversation over the internets.

Originally posted by RJHinds
From wht we know os scientific laws today, a big bang, would most likey destroy
rather than create.

i don't think you have any idea what we know of scientific laws.