The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
For some people it's straight forward, for some they're not bothered and those who can't decide (Agnostics), because I find that each of the topic need more info :
Science
1.The Big Bang Theory - a logical idea, but where does the all the matter in the univrse come from in the first place? Which is compressed in very small space and then exploded.
2.How did the first creatures came into existence out of a stable environment?
3.How did the Big Bang created resources on earth?
e.g metal ores, soil, etc
Religion
1.How did God appear in existence and then create life; perhaps something else created God?
2."God love and care" for people, yet if bad things happen to good people why doesn't God do something about it.
3.How does religion explains the end of life when the sun turns into a red giant and explodes creating a black hole and sucking anything near it?
Which leads me to conclude on my theory that:
God created Earth and all life, then let the people to decide whether they believe in God or not.
Assuming God is in existence, God thought about what life materials life would need and created them within Earth?
The end of life when the sun enlarges and the explodes, perhaps too many people sinned? God did not intend for life to carry on?
Any ideas?
Science
1.The Big Bang Theory - a logical idea, but where does the all the matter in the univrse come from in the first place? Which is compressed in very small space and then exploded.
2.How did the first creatures came into existence out of a stable environment?
3.How did the Big Bang created resources on earth?
e.g metal ores, soil, etc
Religion
1.How did God appear in existence and then create life; perhaps something else created God?
2."God love and care" for people, yet if bad things happen to good people why doesn't God do something about it.
3.How does religion explains the end of life when the sun turns into a red giant and explodes creating a black hole and sucking anything near it?
Which leads me to conclude on my theory that:
God created Earth and all life, then let the people to decide whether they believe in God or not.
Assuming God is in existence, God thought about what life materials life would need and created them within Earth?
The end of life when the sun enlarges and the explodes, perhaps too many people sinned? God did not intend for life to carry on?
Any ideas?
Page:
Ant wrote:
> And Bullett, thanks for calling me ignorant and misinformed!! Really
> appreciate it.
Er, sorry about that. i kinda worded it poorly and tarred all religious people with my spackerbrush. I'll edit it out as reading it back, it's not what I was getting at at all.
Apologies.
> And Bullett, thanks for calling me ignorant and misinformed!! Really
> appreciate it.
Er, sorry about that. i kinda worded it poorly and tarred all religious people with my spackerbrush. I'll edit it out as reading it back, it's not what I was getting at at all.
Apologies.
Insane Bartender.
But he's too busy with fluffy handcuffs and whatnot.
I miss him and his bird having arguments on here.
But he's too busy with fluffy handcuffs and whatnot.
I miss him and his bird having arguments on here.
And if we do get it right, who's going to know and confirm it?
Cant you people just pop last month's Science Vs Religion thread?
Nobody has anything new or interesting to say, it's a subject that has been debated by the greatest minds known since the dawn of time and Copernicus being placed under house arrest by the Church for suggesting the earth revolved around the sun and not vice versa.
And if nobel prize winners and that spakky bloke with the speak and spell voice can't work it out, what chance a bunch of webmongs?
Nobody has anything new or interesting to say, it's a subject that has been debated by the greatest minds known since the dawn of time and Copernicus being placed under house arrest by the Church for suggesting the earth revolved around the sun and not vice versa.
And if nobel prize winners and that spakky bloke with the speak and spell voice can't work it out, what chance a bunch of webmongs?
Rai wrote:
> Someone's been doing their Religion and Science coursework...
>
> It's true, there aren't any dinosaurs mentioned in the Bible.
:| Apart from the fact that there are. Everyone seems to assume this 'fact' that dinosaurs aren't mentioned in the Bible, when they are.
Search Google for it, there are a number of references, but obviously they're not called "dinosaurs" because we made up that name.
EDIT - [URL]http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/dinos.shtml[/URL]
There you go. Leviathans and Behemoths.
And Bullett, thanks for calling me ignorant and misinformed!! Really appreciate it.
> Someone's been doing their Religion and Science coursework...
>
> It's true, there aren't any dinosaurs mentioned in the Bible.
:| Apart from the fact that there are. Everyone seems to assume this 'fact' that dinosaurs aren't mentioned in the Bible, when they are.
Search Google for it, there are a number of references, but obviously they're not called "dinosaurs" because we made up that name.
EDIT - [URL]http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/dinos.shtml[/URL]
There you go. Leviathans and Behemoths.
And Bullett, thanks for calling me ignorant and misinformed!! Really appreciate it.
I doubt I'll contribute to the thread, but thought I'd have my own little babble about the subject(s).
Religion:
Firstly, I refuse to believe we were created by an omnipotent being, who can click his fingers and create stuff. And the whole 'Eve created from Adam's Rib' thing is preposterous. As said earlier, there are no mentions of Dinosaurs in the Bible - or in any other religious text as far as I know. I won't get any further into Religion as I seem to easily offend by my retarded choice of words. I'll just say that Religion is not for me though, and I personally don't agree with it. Apologies if anyone was offended by what I wrote before the edit.
Science:
Now, although the majority of the scientific argument of the origin of the universe is still largely overwhelming, there are far more explanations/theories that are actually believable, like creation coming about in the form of expelled minerals/gases/liquids, the creation and destruction of massive stars playing a part in the growth of the ever-expanding universe, etc. I belive in the Big Bang theory, but only partly. I dispute the theory that there was absolutely nothing before it. I tend to go with the thought that there was another form of space prior, perhaps along the lines of Fluidic or something as crazy as that. Who's to know? Who's to know anything at all? For all we know, our Universe as we know it could be a by-product of a much bigger one. I doubt it's infinite, as a Big Bang would have exploded outward (obviously), therefore there must be an edge around us somewhere - possibly leading into the other form of space that could have existed before the BB.
Phew, I could go rambling on all morning, but I have a job that invovles at least a little work!
Whether I made sense or not, I don't know. I wouldn't mind hearing other thoughts on a possible universe ours is only a part of. And when I say that, I don't mean parallel ones where we have evil twins or even exact doubles - that'd be stupid.
Religion:
Firstly, I refuse to believe we were created by an omnipotent being, who can click his fingers and create stuff. And the whole 'Eve created from Adam's Rib' thing is preposterous. As said earlier, there are no mentions of Dinosaurs in the Bible - or in any other religious text as far as I know. I won't get any further into Religion as I seem to easily offend by my retarded choice of words. I'll just say that Religion is not for me though, and I personally don't agree with it. Apologies if anyone was offended by what I wrote before the edit.
Science:
Now, although the majority of the scientific argument of the origin of the universe is still largely overwhelming, there are far more explanations/theories that are actually believable, like creation coming about in the form of expelled minerals/gases/liquids, the creation and destruction of massive stars playing a part in the growth of the ever-expanding universe, etc. I belive in the Big Bang theory, but only partly. I dispute the theory that there was absolutely nothing before it. I tend to go with the thought that there was another form of space prior, perhaps along the lines of Fluidic or something as crazy as that. Who's to know? Who's to know anything at all? For all we know, our Universe as we know it could be a by-product of a much bigger one. I doubt it's infinite, as a Big Bang would have exploded outward (obviously), therefore there must be an edge around us somewhere - possibly leading into the other form of space that could have existed before the BB.
Phew, I could go rambling on all morning, but I have a job that invovles at least a little work!
Whether I made sense or not, I don't know. I wouldn't mind hearing other thoughts on a possible universe ours is only a part of. And when I say that, I don't mean parallel ones where we have evil twins or even exact doubles - that'd be stupid.
munn wrote:
> Memorandum! wrote:
> The Big Bang concept is no more difficult to accept than the concept
> of God.
>
> A concept I can't accept either.
>
> And teh reason I can't, is because what was before it?
>
> A vacuum is something with absolutely nothing in it - that's what
> space is.
>
> But if space appeared after the Big Bang, then what was there before
> it?
>
> Nothing? Well, that can't be right, because that's just space again.
>
>
> I think a more apt theory is that the universe is infinite and always
> has been.
>
> After all, if there are all these dimensions that we don't
> understand, there's probably something bigger than time that we can't
> comprehend.
>
> Or something stupid like that.
There is a theory called the big crunch, which states the universe is constantly expanding and contracting. The only problem is that it depends on the mass of the universe. If the mass is higher than a certain limit then then gravitational attraction between atoms will overcome the expanding force due to the big bang and electrostitic repulsion. Causing the universe to contract. At the moment current observations show that there is insufficient mass in the universe to cause this event.
However the study is not complete, and no one has accurately recorded the mass of neutrinos. Their existence is known, but since they have no charge and have negligible mass, but there are immesurably large amounts of neutrinos, their combined mass could increase the known mass of the universe so that the big crunch situation could occur.
> Memorandum! wrote:
> The Big Bang concept is no more difficult to accept than the concept
> of God.
>
> A concept I can't accept either.
>
> And teh reason I can't, is because what was before it?
>
> A vacuum is something with absolutely nothing in it - that's what
> space is.
>
> But if space appeared after the Big Bang, then what was there before
> it?
>
> Nothing? Well, that can't be right, because that's just space again.
>
>
> I think a more apt theory is that the universe is infinite and always
> has been.
>
> After all, if there are all these dimensions that we don't
> understand, there's probably something bigger than time that we can't
> comprehend.
>
> Or something stupid like that.
There is a theory called the big crunch, which states the universe is constantly expanding and contracting. The only problem is that it depends on the mass of the universe. If the mass is higher than a certain limit then then gravitational attraction between atoms will overcome the expanding force due to the big bang and electrostitic repulsion. Causing the universe to contract. At the moment current observations show that there is insufficient mass in the universe to cause this event.
However the study is not complete, and no one has accurately recorded the mass of neutrinos. Their existence is known, but since they have no charge and have negligible mass, but there are immesurably large amounts of neutrinos, their combined mass could increase the known mass of the universe so that the big crunch situation could occur.
:)
Frag's our version of Ross from Friends :)
Someone's been doing their Religion and Science coursework...
It's true, there aren't any dinosaurs mentioned in the Bible. Personally, I'm agnostic, except there seems to be more evidence against God than for him.
If we should really believe in him, then he'll have to show us.
Go on God, take your best shot!
It's true, there aren't any dinosaurs mentioned in the Bible. Personally, I'm agnostic, except there seems to be more evidence against God than for him.
If we should really believe in him, then he'll have to show us.
Go on God, take your best shot!
Page: