Fox Fire

No, I have an avid interest in cosmology and probably understand the Big Bang better than anyone here. Everything that currently exists in our universe didn't just appear out of nowhere. It evolved over billions of years as a singularity fragments. You can think of it like taking a prism and separating the colors of sunlight into a rainbow. Everything that exists is just a piece or strain of the singularity. It has always been there because it existed before time itself. Time, is fundamentally a part of it, not outside of it. The Big Bang theory can only be calculated back to the Plank Epoch, but at no point, anywhere in the theory at all, does it ever suggest that the universe in all of it's totality, did not exist. And yes, I believe that existence has always existed. There is no beginning or end. The Big Bang is just a small part of an endless cycle of continuous "being". The concept of infinite is not absurd at all. Infinite is a well known number in physics because it's concept is very real. Your idea that God is instead infinite is far more crazy.

The universe didn't come from "nothing". Everything in the universe was always in the universe. Your argument also remains invalid: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Validity

So you acknowledge that God is immoral then?.... You seem confused... You don't understand the Big Bang. The Big Bang theory never states, at any point anywhere, that the universe at any point, did not exist. In fact, it implies that it's simply always been there if anything beyond the singularity is implied at all. The universe and everything in it is what has always been there. Also, you should try applying your own logic to God instead of blatantly ignoring it like it somehow makes sense. If something can not come into being from nothing, if something that doesn't exist can't bring itself into existence (science actually says you're wrong, btw) then neither can God. If you're going to hold that viewpoint then you must remain consistent in your conclusion, otherwise you're making an invalid argument. Everything you just said is contradictory.

Also, all three of those religions are full of stories about oppression, violence and war, with a happy ending for only true believers of whatever the true of the trio may be. At the end of the day, who's to say the almighty Vissarion is not the real deal, hmm? I mean sure, he seems like an insane creepy cult leader with a village of followers in the mountains, but maybe it's legit. He thinks so. And so do all the weird followers. Praise be to Vissarion!

Barrack Obama is the president of the US. Strongest nation on earth. Surely he is a prophet, or even a God. There is no other reasoning. /sarcasm

Actually, much of the authorship of the bible (new test.) is uncertain, debated and even anonymous. Some of it was indeed written long after Jesus. The bible does demean women from the very begging. Women were not made in Gods image, men were. Eve was created from Adams rib so she could not reject him. The choice to make women from men, rather than equal to men, is due to the archaic patriarchal concept of marriage being a contract of essentially ownership. The God of all Abrahamic religions defies it's own morals countless times in Abrahamic tradition. Everything from killing children for speaking cruel words to ordering acts of genocide by his followers.

The !@#$ are you on about?

That's ridiculous. Quality of life is not a set geographical fact. The entire planet could migrate to the US and then our quality of life would all go down. How about people stay where they are and stop letting their governments not do their job?

Time is a dimension, just like height, width and depth. And the chemical reaction is just like any other natural reaction we see on Earth. The Earth as a whole is a giant super organism that we are a part of. There is no scientific consensus as to how exactly life started, but we know it can be naturally formed, even in the vacuum of empty space, given the right materials. Life itself could have formed in space as microbes before coming to Earth. However, the conditions of Earth were perfectly suitable to form life. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Urey_experiment

You mean like how China makes everyone cheap crap? I think a degree of protectionism is necessary for the sake of living equality. The benefits of free trade are benefits of exploitation. For example: Of course they aren't forced. Nobody wants to be a dirt farmer, because they would make no profits and starve to death trying to sell people what they stand on. So they have to work relentless jobs just to make the bare necessities to survive with no realistic hope of ever moving beyond this social situation. It's exploitation of a persons situation. The same way illegal immigrant are hired on farms around here. Because farmers know they will work for less money, as they are desperate and can't get a real job. Japan does the same thing to foreigners from China and completely screws them financially under false pretenses.

Americans are pretty !@#$ing stupid. How else do you get Donald Trump leading in presidential polls anywhere? Our education system is pretty pathetic and it's pretty much absolute morons that vote for all of our politicians. What do you expect?

All life is, is an incredibly complex chemical reaction. Similar to literally everything else in the universe like the ground you're standing on. DNA is just a molecule. A chemical, which makes up all of the information we perceive as being "me". It's the same as dropping Mentos in a bottle of coke and watching it fizz up. That's why you're born in a womb and eventually die, because the chemical reaction cannot indefinitely sustain itself and thus changes its chemistry. Every thought that goes through your mind is a chemical, the very foundation of every living thing on earth is a natural chemical which formed completely naturally due to the geographical and climate conditions on Earth. It is a paradox, and that means it has no beginning or end. People search for a cause to things because we have a limited existence founded on cause and effect. However, as pointed out before, in order for anything to happen, there must be time. Nothing happens without time. Fundamentally impossible in every conceivable way. Outside the universe, there simply is no time. Time exists within the universe, thus your idea that there must be some beginning at a point where "beginning" is a completely non-existent concept entirely, is silly.

I think you're smoking crack, buddy.

They come from literally nothing and everything at once. Overall, it's all the same exact thing and it's always been. It just "is" and that's all we will ever know, because there doesn't appear to be a logical justification for existence. No, I can not prove these claims, but they have more scientific validity than God.

>Slavery = Consent. lol.

No, I said it was physically impossible for a tree to build a bridge. I did however make it very clear in my opening argument that existence is illogical and spontaneous, even referencing quantum fluctuation, the act of particles, physical matter, spontaneously popping in and out of existence at random. Which is the act of the universe in motion. Further more, I also argued that just because something is an unknown, doesn't mean God did it, because there is simply no reason (<key word there) to think a God exists. Finally, I also argued that naming God is just moving the goal post to a location that for all we know, doesn't exist, and that existence itself, still remains illogical and that one can assume the phenomena of existence is omnipotent with more validity than the idea of a deity. This doesn't even touch of my argument about how it's quite impossible for a God to exist and have morals, thoughts, concepts, etc. You see if God is real, then his will is simply everything at once. Not any specific thing. Anything that has or ever will happen is by default the actions and will of God, thus making God inherently contradictory to his own moral teachings. You've countered not a single one of these points. All you've done is ask a trick question that can't even be considered a valid argument. "Men create bridges, thus God created the universe" is an invalid argument.

Actually, let me re-address this: You're comparing an act of individual intellect born of an individual and distinctly unique self awareness to the phenomena of nature. We know that bridge cannot build itself because we have observational and experimental evidence to support this claim. However, we don't have any of this for God. We can say that skyscraper is the result of a self awareness projecting it's own definable concepts onto its surroundings, and such a claim would be "fact" based on experimentation and observation. but we can't say this about natural objects, like a star for example. All objective evidence from observation and experimentation show absolutely nothing to support a self awareness projecting will upon the object in order to make it. We do know however, that things appear to create themselves without an self aware actor.

But it's not. I just explained to you how it very much, is physically possible. So physically possible, that it's happening right now, in front of your face. You're watching the whole thing.

Why not just legalize drugs?

Ted Cruz is pretty damn bad on foreign policy, yes. I highly doubt Trump would do the slightest thing to fix corruption. He would probably tackle corruption the way Putin tackled corruption if anything (which is basically to make everything so corrupt that people stop talking about it). Overall, I find Trump to be a spontaneous dimwit. It's scary to have people like that ruling a nation. I don't want another leader like Bush who creates ideas off the top of his head and commits to them regardless of future revelations. The poor are what I'm concerned about, being poor. And none of the Republican candidates will do anything for them. I don't think Hillary would either. The only candidate I'd even entertain the idea of in this election is Bernie Sanders and I'm pretty sure he won't be our next president.

There is no way of validating such a story thus such an answer cannot be given. However, considering that no tree has ever been recorded as cutting itself into planks, and that such an act is physically impossible, we can assume it's a lie. I hope you have a point here.

It's irrelevant is what it is.

Well congrats. You've definitely lost.

Is this your argument for theism?

Is a guy who sues his own casinos for looking like a shit the guy America wants behind the red button? He blatantly admits to using the flaws in our system for personal gain but yeah, he's going to "fix" that. He plans to build a wall along the border, regardless of the fact that one is already there and that walls have historically been useless money pits, considerably in modern times. He refuses to accept facts and think there is some conspiracy to get a foreign Muslim elected president (all while running for president himself). He claims he will make America great again, as if it's not already the single greatest nation on earth, but refuses to explain how he intends to do that. Hey guys, Bush was pretty popular too. He also made what is arguably the single biggest foreign policy mistake &#33;@#&#036; up the US has ever made in it's history. But screw it. Let's elect the biggest idiot in America, that one mother&#33;@#&#036;er that the UK parliament literally discussed banning from the UK (it's pretty hard to be that stupid). Then we can make Americas second biggest idiot, Sarah Palin, his VP. And finally, we can invade Mexico and annex Kamchatka to expand Palins back yard. It will be great. America will be great!