Having freedom FROM religion:

Originally posted by sonhouse
I love to talk about unknown things that were found by science, such as neutrino's. We can't see em, can't feel em, but we know for 100% sure they are there, we can capture their rare interactions with matter.

Your kind of thing is supernatural and there is zero evidence for that. You have to take it on "Faith", a pile of rubbish in my mind.

That so ...[text shortened]... ore and saving a special place for the winners of the supernatural contest in the sky.

Show me something from nothing!
Show me life spring from non-living material!
Show me the changes that went from from a single cell life to a oak tree!
Show me the creature that went from single sex creature to male and female!
If you cannot show me how theses occured, I'd say random chance can get as
much credit as God was given by you.
There is a lot we don't know, that does not mean that God is real, but it also does
not mean He wasn't required for some of these to occur.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Show me something from nothing!
Show me life spring from non-living material!
Show me the changes that went from from a single cell life to a oak tree!
Show me the creature that went from single sex creature to male and female!
If you cannot show me how theses occured, I'd say random chance can get as
much credit as God was given by you.
There is a lo God is real, but it also does
not mean He wasn't required for some of these to occur.
Kelly

All you have are words, words and more words. You scoff at what science cannot explain, YET, but scoff at what science DOES explain. BTW, the changes in cells from single cell has been shown: Here is one cluster of images showing one tiny worm.

https://www.google.com/[WORD TOO LONG]

and

http://www.wormatlas.org/ver1/handbook/anatomyintro/anatomyintro.htm

I wonder how you will spin the scientific results when we actually figure out how life goes from non-living matter to living matter.

We are getting closer to that riddle every year.

The thing you refuse to understand is science is extremely young in the big picture of things. A few hundred years and look at what we have accomplished.

Hundreds of thousands of years go by for mankind just making slightly better stone tools and a few hundred years ago, a tiny blip in the total age of humans, we have exploded in our ability to explain in depth what the universe is all about.

The fact that we still have plenty to find out is used as a weapon by you to further your agenda of sending us all back to the dim past where everyone depended on the local priest for what was real. You don't WANT science to figure out life.
That would be a total disaster for your man made religion would'nt it.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Show me something from nothing!
Show me life spring from non-living material!
Show me the changes that went from from a single cell life to a oak tree!
Show me the creature that went from single sex creature to male and female!

Oddly enough you don't say why you want them shown to you, nor what you will concede when they are.
Let me predict it instead: you will either deny the results (as you do for relativity, geology, astronomy, biology and just about any other science that contradicts your religion), or you will say 'well I never claimed that my religion depended on me believing that God did that by a miracle, my religion is still valid even if God did that via scientific laws'.
So whats the point?

Of course I can actually answer all four of your questions. I'll give you the answer to question 4 for free: All sexually reproducing organisms.

Originally posted by sonhouse
All you have are words, words and more words. You scoff at what science cannot explain, YET, but scoff at what science DOES explain. BTW, the changes in cells from single cell has been shown: Here is one cluster of images showing one tiny worm.

https://www.google.com/search?q=elegans+life+cycle&hl=en&newwindow=1&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=BXJEUZf ...[text shortened]... ce to figure out life.
That would be a total disaster for your man made religion would'nt it.

I believe that we can say with certainty that man did not produce the first life. So for you to put your faith in man seems to be a bit misplaced.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Oddly enough you don't say why you want them shown to you, nor what you will concede when they are.
Let me predict it instead: you will either deny the results (as you do for relativity, geology, astronomy, biology and just about any other science that contradicts your religion), or you will say 'well I never claimed that my religion depended on me belie stions. I'll give you the answer to question 4 for free: All sexually reproducing organisms.

The complaint you make is that we don't need God for what we see around us
stands out to me. We have gone round and round about living complex systems
overcoming odds on springing up too. You live in a world where it is all so
complex and interconnected that if you cannot see the need of God you are
quite purposely blind to it all in my opinion. Your responses about we don't at
this time know some how some of this occured but we will is faith on your part
no less than anyone who says God did it, and you believe the people who tell
you such things too.
Kelly

ItOriginally posted by KellyJay
The complaint you make is that we don't need God for what we see around us
stands out to me. We have gone round and round about living complex systems
overcoming odds on springing up too. You live in a world where it is all so
complex and interconnected that if you cannot see the need of God you are
quite purposely blind to it all in my opinion. Your ...[text shortened]... n anyone who says God did it, and you believe the people who tell
you such things too.
Kelly

It is not a matter of faith to me since I work directly in an applied science field assisting two Phd's in a materials science project so we don't do faith we do experiments that either give good data or bad, either way we use the failures as much as the successes. There is no faith and I don't believe what others say but what has been independently verified.

I am very good at what I do, way above average in seeing phenomena even the Phd's miss in our own jobs here.

I don't have to depend on faith, that is extremely clear.

BTW, you asked to see something from nothing, take a gander at this:

Look up the Casimir effect, you will find it enlightening. Well for you maybe not, but look at this piece:

http://phys.org/news/2013-03-nihilo-dynamical-casimir-effect-metamaterial.html#ajTabs

LITERALLY something from nothing.

Originally posted by sonhouse
It is not a matter of faith to me since I work directly in an applied science field assisting two Phd's in a materials science project so we don't do faith we do experiments that either give good data or bad, either way we use the failures as much as the successes. There is no faith and I don't believe what others say but what has been independently verifie ...[text shortened]... hilo-dynamical-casimir-effect-metamaterial.html#ajTabs

LITERALLY something from nothing.

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools...

(Romans 1:20-22)

Originally posted by RJHinds
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

[b]Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools...

(Romans 1:20-22)[/b]

Blah Blah Blah. More words. If you have something supernatural to throw at me, be my guest. Until then, all you have is ancient weather worn words. The words of men, nothing more, since Paulism is totally man made in the first place, made up by Paul, a snake oil salesman who had to come up with a religion that would fly in Rome.

Originally posted by sonhouse
It is not a matter of faith to me since I work directly in an applied science field assisting two Phd's in a materials science project so we don't do faith we do experiments that either give good data or bad, either way we use the failures as much as the successes. There is no faith and I don't believe what others say but what has been independently verifie ...[text shortened]... hilo-dynamical-casimir-effect-metamaterial.html#ajTabs

LITERALLY something from nothing.

It is a matter of faith when you talk about things that cannot be tested for or was
ever witnessed that must be taken on faith. You do not know how, when, why the
universe started, you have never witnessed life going from a non-living material
and changing into an Oak tree, but you believe you know much about both of those
things as being true.

I've NEVER stated science was worthless, and your job by the sounds mind blowing
incredible too.

Your experiment was not something from nothing by the way if you read it you'll
see that, "While not containing physical particles, neither is it an empty void." I do
not believe you or they can say it contains no physical particles either, I do
believe it could be said that there was none we can see or record would be better
put since we do have limits in how we view everything.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Your responses about we don't at this time know some how some of this occured but we will is faith on your part no less than anyone who says God did it, and you believe the people who tell you such things too.
Kelly

No, it is not faith on my part. It is knowledge based on experience. I actually know that some of the things you claim require God, have already been proven by science to not require God in fact this constitutes nearly everything in your question list. I also know that historically many people believed as you do that God was required for many things, yet science resolved them one by one and discovered their inner workings.
As I said, I can actually answer all your questions and give reasons why I think God is not required, whereas you cannot give any actual reasons as to why you think God is required. As I said, if I prove to you that God is not required, you will either deny the evidence (as you do for most of science) or you will simply move the goal posts and list something else you think God is required for.

Originally posted by KellyJay
It is a matter of faith when you talk about things that cannot be tested for or was
ever witnessed that must be taken on faith. You do not know how, when, why the
universe started, you have never witnessed life going from a non-living material
and changing into an Oak tree, but you believe you know much about both of those
things as being true.

I've see or record would be better
put since we do have limits in how we view everything.
Kelly

If you don't believe there is nothing there, no actual particles, you should read up on the subject before making rash statements, another aspect of simple belief not derived from experimentation. There were no particles, just the background fluxing of energy like water boiling in a pot, in this case an invisible pot and invisible energy.

The universe has this background of boiling energy on a tiny ultra small scale.

Look up the casimir effect, he was the one who figured out that part of the mystery of the universe.

Out of this sea of microscopic boiling energy, if you just put two plates, say copper, and get them close together, VERY close together, there is a chance that the vacuum energy will produce actual particles in the space between the plates where the energy in a way is like sound bouncing back and forth between two walls, it kind of resonates in such a way as to make particles appear that would ordinarily never come into existence. It also produces a tiny force, actual measurable force that either pushes the plates apart or sucks them together, I forget which way, I am only doing this from memory, my wife is pulling me away from the computer as we speak to go to the store to get a St. Patrick's day corn beef briskets.

Originally posted by sonhouse
If you don't believe there is nothing there, no actual particles, you should read up on the subject before making rash statements, another aspect of simple belief not derived from experimentation. There were no particles, just the background fluxing of energy like water boiling in a pot, in this case an invisible pot and invisible energy.

The universe h ...[text shortened]... rom the computer as we speak to go to the store to get a St. Patrick's day corn beef briskets.

You really need to take a step back and read what I wrote.
Kelly

Originally posted by sonhouse
Blah Blah Blah. More words. If you have something supernatural to throw at me, be my guest. Until then, all you have is ancient weather worn words. The words of men, nothing more, since Paulism is totally man made in the first place, made up by Paul, a snake oil salesman who had to come up with a religion that would fly in Rome.

All you have is words that prove your head is still up your arse. You have no science that proves God does not exist and that He is not required for the creation of the laws in the universe or the creation of life from the dust of the ground. Your science can not tell us where these laws come from.

Biogenesis is a law of science that says life can only come from life. Science gives no explanation for where the first life came from or what it was, but the Holy Bible does. The answer is GOD. 😏

HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! Holy! Holy! Holy!

Originally posted by RJHinds
All you have is words that prove your head is still up your arse. You have no science that proves God does not exist and that He is not required for the creation of the laws in the universe or the creation of life from the dust of the ground. Your science can not tell us where these laws come from.

Biogenesis is a law of science that says life can only ...[text shortened]... he Holy Bible does. The answer is GOD. 😏

HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! Holy! Holy! Holy!

Interesting that biosgenesis is now a law, that you accept as science but evolution is just a crackpot theory.

It is up to you to prove there is a god, I don't have to prove anything. You know full well there is no way to prove supernatural events scientifically since it is by definition out of the bounds of science. Talk about circular reasoning. With you it's more like a deflated balloon.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Interesting that biosgenesis is now a law, that you accept as science but evolution is just a crackpot theory.

It is up to you to prove there is a god, I don't have to prove anything. You know full well there is no way to prove supernatural events scientifically since it is by definition out of the bounds of science. Talk about circular reasoning. With you it's more like a deflated balloon.

The law of biogenesis, attributed to Louis Pasteur, is the observation that living things come only from other living things, by reproduction (e.g. a spider lays eggs, which develop into spiders). That is, life does not arise from non-living material, which was the position held by spontaneous generation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biogenesis

Evolution is not a law of science. It has been elevated from an hypothesis to a theory through trickery and statements of believe rather than facts. It has even been redefined to mean nothing more than a change. So who can argue that change does not take place? But I refuse to accept that definition. My definition requires that a reptile can change into a bird or a monkey can change into a man. To me that is the crackpot theory of evolution.