Religion vs. Science

From the SKEPTIC mailing list:

First, the Christian:

  • How do you know your god exists?
  • The Bible says so.
  • How do you know the Bible tells the truth?
  • I have faith.
  • What if the Bible is wrong and your god doesn’t exist?
  • That’s impossible.

Now the physicist:

  • How do you know charge comes in discrete packets?
  • When you do this thing with an oil drop and an electric field, it shows
    the discrete nature of charge.
  • How do you know that?
  • Here’s the protocol. Try it out yourself if you wish.
  • What if the experiment is wrong, and charge is continuous?
  • That would be a great discovery.

144 thoughts on “Religion vs. Science”

  1. Well, a nice snippet of biassed information here.
    Its good to see the christian having faith in a book that once said the world was flat!

  2. Yes, congratulations to that skeptic mailing list. Because we all know every christian’s beliefs are completely as one dimensional as the message makes out, and that every physicist welcomes new theories with open arms, open minded to every possible consequence. Furthermore, as the message suggests, a physicist cannot be a christian and a christian cannot be a physicist. Well done, skeptic mailing list. Well. Done.

  3. “Furthermore, as the message suggests, a physicist cannot be a christian and a christian cannot be a physicist.”

    The message suggests no such thing. It suggests a Christian physicist can’t use the same approach to science he or she uses for religion.

  4. If a Christian physicist cant use the same approach as a purely scientific physicist, where is the line that decides when it is appropriate to use religion and when is it appropriate to use science?

  5. …look here christians!!!. The bible says do not consom poisons that would hurt your body…correct!Weed makes you lose ur brain cells,so it would be considered a poison…which god does not want us to do…so why would he create it and put it on earth if he created earth?He pratically told us to do it!I was told if there was no gor or religion to believe we would be in chaos….but im athiest and live evryday as any other person that believes in god!!!

  6. God created many things that can be harmful. this is not a perfect world and was not intended to be. He granted us freedom. if things such as weed, alcohol, guns, money, etc did’t exist, we couldn’t make the choice to not do them. he would be forcing us to not sin. it must be our choice to do what is right.

  7. why is there hell? God is forgiving if you believe in Him, do His will, and pray for forgiveness.
    “If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer.”
    (Whole Chapter: Matthew 21 In context: Matthew 21:21-23)
    For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.
    (Whole Chapter: Matthew 6 In context: Matthew 6:13-15)

    Matthew 6:15
    But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.
    (Whole Chapter: Matthew 6 In context: Matthew 6:14-16)

    Matthew 12:31
    And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.
    (Whole Chapter: Matthew 12 In context: Matthew 12:30-32)

  8. Sorry, but you people are idiots. The reason why there is a hell: people who reject God and don’t believe in him. If there’s a nuclear explosion and you all of the sudden ask for forgiveness just because you’re going to die, that doesn’t cut it. Actually read the Bible, people. Just don’t skim through it and find random quotes that pronounce forgiveness. People like you who try claim something without thorough evidence make me disgusted.

  9. if there was a nuclear explosion and u all of a sudden asked for forgiveness, no, that wouldn’t cut it. however, if you realized that there IS a God, regret your wrongs, and ask to be forgiven, you will be forgiven.
    SORRY to break it to you but you say there is hell for those who dont believe in God? thats funny becuz im pretty sure that even the DEVIL BELIEVES IN GOD. he just refuses to follow.

  10. whether you repent at th beginning or end, your sins shall be forgiven so that you may enter heaven.

    Matthew 20
    11When they received it, they began to grumble against the landowner. 12’These men who were hired last worked only one hour,’ they said, ‘and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the work and the heat of the day.’
    13″But he answered one of them, ‘Friend, I am not being unfair to you. Didn’t you agree to work for a denarius?14Take your pay and go. I want to give the man who was hired last the same as I gave you. 15Don’t I have the right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?’
    16″So the last will be first, and the first will be last.”

  11. He wasn’t. He always has been and always will be. He is the alpha and omega. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

  12. all you people talking out against this proof are wrong. religion is wrong and modern science is well on its way to proving that.

  13. hmmm….seems to me that modern science is well on its way to discovering that Christianity cannot be disproved. They recently (2002) found a soft limestone box that once held bones. “James,Son of Joseph, Brother of Jesus” is engraved in Aramaic on the side. Non-believer scientists examined it and agreed that it dates back to the exact decade that the Bible says James died. They also agree that it is genuine. Yes, i know that James, Joseph, and Jesus were all common names at that time. However, other ossuaries with the brother’s name included… have yet to be found.

  14. do you care to explain why? anyone who ever wants to discuss this, other than on this site, can email or IM me ( anytime.

  15. Bria, where did you grow up? What is your social background? Are Muslims born to a Muslim family wrong in their belief in the Koran wrong. If you answer yes then you do not know your history of religion. I think its hillarius that any person on this earth (any RELIGION) that thinks theirs is the only is, I dont know what to call it, I guess it is ignorance. Dont be offended, believe. Do you know what the term Metaphysical means? Look it up, that is what god is. Metaphysical,you cant see it, touch it, smell it, talk to it. Come on.

    God, the omega and the alpha. Ha, what kind of god is it that lets millions of people starve or die in wars or Hollocausts, and then helps some athlete win a gold medal in the olympics. Or gives an actor an oscar, what am I talking about? Everytime someone gets something in their favor, they say “I want to thank God”. Nice entity to worship, a murderer and sadist, who kills his own people if they do not believe in him, hell I dont think Hussein is that evil.

    Ok you can get offended on this part.
    You are an idiot, you stupid christian piece of shit, I cant wait till you die then you wont see anything because there is nothing but decomposition, do you know what that means?


  16. I’m from Ohio and i’ve grown up in a loving family. I’m a double major in biology and chemistry and im minoring in dance. You can insult my intelligence if it makes you feel better about yourself but i’m very aware of my mental abilities and i do not care for your opinion.

    God does not give the gold medal to gymnasts nor a platinum selling record to a musician. these are our results of our choices, behaviors, and sometimes just luck. the same goes with all of the evil our world contains. Sometimes something might happen that we cant explain, but these things can always be used to our benefits.

    you are the type of people that fight against having prayer in school, the ten commandments in court houses, and “one nation under God” in the pledge of allegiance. so why is it that you can blame death, poverty, starvation, and diseases on God?

  17. i never said that my religion is the only religion. i agree…that would be ignorant of one to believe. there are thousands of religions. i’m just saying that i do not believe in or practice any other religion. none of them can touch my heart like the Bible.

    i think you could use a little religion in your life. i strongly believe that God exists. even if He didnt, i would still want to be Christian because of the love,good principles and practices that come with it. it helps me to live a happy and fulfilled life. i pity you for the hate in your soul.

  18. I really feel sorry for you non-believers. Even if you don’t believe in God how can you have so much hate for people who do? To me, that just shows you that you need something in your life. Whether thats religion or a pschologist. Get some help buddy!


  19. i do not believe in God, but i respect others if they choose to. the bible may not be right in my opinion, but it does teach valuable lessons. so i think religion is wrong, but those who follow it are generally good people.

  20. i find it very sad that so many people beleive in this so called god. i think it is pure ignorance. in my opinion, all religion is, is an explanation for the unknown. a long time ago people said the wrold was flat, because they didn’t know what else to beleive. i am not trying to disrespect anyones religion, because some people are just brought up a certain way. but i am calling you retarded for beleiving things that don’t make any sence. if you beleive in all these things in the bible than you must beleive in magic. ex. did someone really part the red sea? were adam and eve really the first people? was someone swallowed by a whale and survive? (any1 with a brain should know thats not true)who wrote the bible? human beings did. how do you know what they wrote is true? well you don’t. “you have to have faith” well i don’t have faith, and apparently im going to hell according to the bible. and i have read about hell in the bible, and i don’t think anyone deserves to go there. there are many poor, innocent children who havn’t had the opportunity to fallow the chrisitan religion, and according to your god, they are gonig to hell. now i think thats pretty fucked up. and if there is a god, fuck you. with all of my heart. if all of this is true than god is by far the most fucked up person, ever. i do beleive however, the ten commandments. but those are simple morals. eventually science is going to prove almost the entire bible to be false. and when that happends, all these people that fallow a religion, that simply came from other people, that wern’t nearly as smart as us, they are going to go crazy becuase they will have lost there faith and reason for living. so eventually religion is going to fuck everything up. this isn’t a stab at people who beleive in god. but i’ll be happy if my little slap in the face changes one of you religous freaks. just think logically. i think its so obvious, yet so many people think its true. please respond to this, so i can hear your releigious point of view.

  21. hey man, don’t inslut anyone, that really hurts your credibility. i agree with you for the most part, but you really shouldn’t put down anyone who does not. that makes me just want to ignore you.

  22. Charlie:
    First, the Bible even says that all children will be saved. Jesus speaks of how innocent they are. I’m not sure of the exact verse, but i can look it up.
    Secondly, i find your entire entry merely amusing due to the lack of intelligent thought, spelling, and grammar. There is an astounding amount of irony in your so-called paragraph. How can a person like you dare to call anyone “retarded” while typing something so meaningless? How can you say that you aren’t “trying to disrespect anyone’s religion” at the same time you are saying that their beliefs are based on ignorance? No one will ever convince me that God does not exist and especially someone with the language of a thug and the mental capacity of a young child.

  23. Since im a newcomer and physicist/skeptic of religion, I would just like to bring in the concept of perception based upon quantum experiments done by the world’s most respected physicists: Perception. When scientists went to define the coexistence of Quantum theory and General Relativity, they found out that only certain things are true when they are being searched for. If you are in an everlasting search for a god, then you will eventually find a god. If you quest for the theory to disprove God because God does not exist according to your perception, then you will find that there is indeed no god. You can read into this if you like. I recommend the book “Who is Afraid of Schrodingers Cat”. This book accurately explains all concieved theories including the closest to the Theory of Everything: Superstring Theory.

  24. The anger on this site is overwhelming… why does God offend the atheists so? Is it because you have nagging doubt about your point of view, and thus you must rail against the contradictory?

  25. “The anger on this site is overwhelming… why does God offend the atheists so? Is it because you have nagging doubt about your point of view, and thus you must rail against the contradictory?”

    I think the real question is – why do people with different world views offend Christians so much?

    BTW – where’s the anger on this site?

  26. i once saw a sign in front of a church that said “don’t believe in God? he believes in you” and this made me kind of angry. it said i was wrong not to beleive in god, but that’s okay, cause he forgives me. this disrespected me and my beliefs. before this incident i held respect for that church, but now it is gone in my mind.

  27. personally I do not believe in A god … I do believe that there was some thing or one that caused the big bang…

    for the people that are rooting for religion:
    god. its a word, to some its a feeling, to others a being unfathomable to humans. god can unite people, destroy people. but god can also creat war. I know you say that this is not meant to be a perfect world, but why not? also… I know that you say god was always here and always will be, but to my knowladge (i spelled that wrong) there is no such thing as forever, somthing had to come before, something has to come after…
    To the people rooting for science:
    is it so hard to believe there is a god? why cant science help prove there is a god? How can you stand there and say that 1+1=2? can you prove that, for instance if there was someone that knew nothing of math, how would you prove that to them? you cannot just say that everyone has to believe you, its insane. I firmly believe in the good of science but come on, we based it on human work, and what are humans but flawed beings?

    I do not want to root for either side. I only want to put ideas out in the world. I have no quarrel with religous or scientific people. but then again, can one not be both?

    With a double oppion,

  28. Wow…you lost respect for Christians all because of one sign? That’s as bad as me saying that i lost respect for teachers because i heard one make an ignorant remark. If you saw one rotten apple at Acme, would that mean you would never buy apples there because they must all be rotten?

  29. BTW “I Beam”, before you make a comment on the intelligence level of the people posting messages on this site, you should learn to spell the word!

  30. anyone that would like to dicuss this topic can email me at i believein God and have faith in him. i have a question, do you believe Jesus as a man existed? if you do then he was either a lunatic, a liar, a legend, or lord of all. how is he a legend if so many people refer to him as a person through history. he couldn’t be a liar because what idiot would die for a lie except a lunatic? if he was a lunatic then how did he teach good teachings like others say he did. that only leaves one more option, that he is waht he said he was God’s son, the savior of humanity from sin. if you can think of anything else jesus could have been then email me.

  31. You all non-christians so lazy. Asking stupid questions like.. “how, what, who,” blah blah blah. If you want to know then, READ THE BIBLE!! Don’t just ask when all the answers are inside there. If you don’t understand what it means in the bible, go to your nearest christian church and ask the pastor/minister. If you don’t believe in God, then good. Don’t just say to all the christians that they are a dumbass or something. I thank you non-christians that you respect those who believes in God.

  32. okay, the earth is very complex right? well how do things get complex? they start simple and small things get added and over a long amount of time. and so if we the earth was created by god, why would things not be simple? one would think they would be, however this is not the case. our complexity came about over millions years of evolution.

  33. hey about evolutotion,that really isn’t possible because of the effects of the “million years” things would be drastically different. there are about 25 examples on which isn’t just a christian website, but a forum that disproves evolution. for example

    “Juvenile water coming out of volcanoes has never been in the oceans before. About 1 cubic mile is added yearly. 340,000,000 cubic miles of water are on earth’s surface.

    Q: How many years would it take to accumulate 340 million cubic miles of water?

    A: 340 million years.

    This implies that there were no oceans 340 million years ago, the supposed age of fishes. So how could life have evolved in the oceans 2,000 million years ago if there were no oceans then?

    (Source: H. Morris, Scientific Creationism, p.156) ”

    “Niagara Falls cliffs wear away at 7 feet per year. From their first mapping in 1678 to 1842 the water wore away the top of the falls at a rate of 7 feet per year. Since the gorge is 7 miles (or 36,000 feet) long,

    the age of the falls = 36,000 divide by 7 = 5,143 years (approx.)

    5,143 years is close to the time of Noah’s flood 4400 years ago. This is nowhere near 100 million years as evolutionists think. ”

    there are many other examples that have been proven facts so check it out and anyone else who believes in evolution.

  34. i don’t read that book because i don’t beleuve it in. my question is not dumb, and i would appreciate you refraining from insults.

  35. *beleive
    -question 1- not all water came out of volanoes
    -question 2- just because the falls aren’t that old means nothing

  36. the study of the water is invalid. in order to have credibility, a study must be random, this is not because it has been studied consecutive years within the last hundred years or so. this cannot accuratly tell us what has happened in our multiple billion year history. who knows? maybe water existed on the surface before the water came up from the volcanoes. untill you can get your facts straight, don’t shove your “proof” on me.

  37. did you read any of the other examples form that site? and umm what evidence do evolutionists have that shows we are evloving right now? besides there are so many other studies that have been proven on that site, besides im just showing you how it isn’t possible that evolution occured and you dont have to believe me but look into it, please. also not all water came out of volcanoes, if they didnt then that leaves less time for evolution to occur. you can argue all the facts. but why haven’t dogs learned how to talk in these past years if we humans have been talking for only thousand of years that are recorded? and sure pople do adapt but we dont go from ape to human because if we did we would be able to produce offspring with them if we evolved from them, wouldnt that be true? also why are there still apes and monkeys if humans evolved from them? the answer is that they didnt which disproves that humans evolved from the bowl of soup or whatever it is, but you should look into your facts before you go telling me to get mine straight since evolution is a theory that doesen’t even now how it would work. but reply i would like to know what you have to say.

    these are 2 other facts from that site:

    “1. Radiohaloes shorten geologic ages of millions of years to a few thousand years.

    Radiohaloes are colour rings around microscopic radioactive minerals in rock crystals.

    “Squashed” Polonium -210 radiohaloes indicate that Jurassic, Triassic and Eocene formations in the Colorado Plateau were deposited within months of one another, not from 225-255 million years apart, as evolution suggests.
    “Orphan” Polonium-218 radiohaloes, having no evidence of their mother elements, imply either instant creation, or drastic changes in radioactive decay rates.

    2.Ocean concentrations of elements flowing in from rivers. If we assume, as evolutionists must, that the oceans were 100% freshwater at the beginning of earth’s history, and knowing that the rivers wash 450 million tonnes of sodium off the continents into the oceans each year, if we factor in any recycling of salt, and knowing that sodium’s concentration in the oceans to be 10,500 mg/m1, then the very maximum number of years required to reach today’s sodium concentration level in the oceans are 260 million years.

    This means that the oceans, and hence earth could not be older than 260 million years. Most other elements give an age to accumulate to today’s level as about 10,000 years. eg. Vanadium (10,000 yr), Cobalt and Nickel (18,000 yr), Copper (50,000 yr), Caesium (40,000 yr). Bismuth (45,000 yr), Calcium (8 million years), Silicon (8,000 yr) etc. “

  38. i did look into it and everything on that site was clearly biased or simply laughable. there are fossils that date back millions of years, long before your creation. disprove that if you can. as to the questions about apes i don’t know, i am no scientist, and i know that evolution can not be proved, and so can not be disproved either.

  39. God created the world in “six days and on the seventh day He rested”…..who is to say what a “day” is to God? It explains in the Bible how short human time is to Him. Therefore, I believe in both evolution and Christianity. There is strong evidence for evolution. The miracles of God and the fact that something greater than us must be responsible for earth’s creation are undeniable. All the doctors i know are firm believers in both God and biology. Science and religion coincide.

  40. . you can’t confirm the existance of god. you can’t deny the existance of god. CULTURE. whether we all realize it or not, god is a part of us. our whole society is based upon fundamental christian values and morals in america. the way most of us perceive this world stems from that. for example, we have this preconcieved notion that cheating on our spouse is wrong, and stealing what does not belong to us is wrong, etc. those are morals and ethics that i hold dear and i have christianity to thank for that, even though i BELIEVE that god does not exist as we know it. if he exists he will show himself to me. i have come to understand that i know somthing isnt true just because another says it is. if he does exist i think it’s on a whole other level that our current minds cannot fathom. keep in mind if is the biggest word we percieve. whatever. in my opinion, the only plausible way for a god to exist is if he created not just the earth, but the vast entirety of the universe. god would have had to create matter. existance. THE POINT OF SINGULARITY-THAT IS THE REAL QUESTION. what happened before that???? that’s where shit like physics steps in…M-theory, string theroy and so on. i actually recommend people check into that. religious or not. free writing is great. oh, and evolution is real. i’m sorry to burst your bubble guy, but stop believing what you see on that site. the only way to truly know what is truth is to experience it. go to HADAR, Ethiopia. ask questions. find answers. i highly recommend it. very cheap too. 🙂 – my perception

  41. Quite obviously, the author is just making a simple comparison to the ways of thinking.
    Being bias is not a bad thing. It is a simple method for people to express their views. Biasim is sometimes unintentional.

    Saying that someone is “gay” is not an insult. Please grow up.

  42. I dont think the wrong questions were asked, i just think the answers werent specific. Like for instance, with the question: How do you know the Bible is true? Well, did you know that not one archeological find proves the Bible wrong but many prove it right? And how about the fact that the bible was written over a span of about 1,500 years by 40 different authors, on 3 different continents, in 3 different languages, and in 10 different types of literature yet it does not teach against itself. And also, dozens of predictions about the future in the Bible have come true. That fact may not sound like much but did you know that the odds of just one of those predictions randomly coming true is 1 in 5.76*10^57!!! Thats like covering the entire state of Texas 4 feet deep with quarters and blind folding someone and telling them to pick one with an “x” on it. How’s that for facts? And for those who think science explains EVERYTHING, did you know that according to science, there is no way that a bumblebee should be able to fly? According to science, for a bumblebee to fly, it would have to flap its wings so fast to counter its mass, that the energy required would literally burn up the bee. That doesn’t stop a bee from flying now does it? If you’re one of those people so in to science, i recremmend the Bible, because it is like one big science book. You may think after reading this that im some old Christain fanatic or something but in fact im just a 15 year old girl who is using what I learned and studied to answer questions like these.
    ~if God could be explained, He wouldn’t be God.

  43. audrey, u may be the smartest 15yr old girl i’ve ever talked to. i agree with you on almost all everything you said. scientists even agree that science cannot explain certain things. i’m a huge fan of science (biology premed major) but an even bigger fan of God.

  44. How can evolution be true if it was we would still be evolving! Why can’t you read the bible just because you don’t beleive? I read all the stuff about the big bang and evolution even though I disagree. That doesn’t make any sense!

  45. who said they “can’t read the Bible”?? that’s ridiculous. If this is true, Ignorance, not Christianity, is their worst enemy! Well anyways, we ARE indeed still evolving but i DO believe in God and i’m a Christian.

  46. well, your comment just proves that you need God in your life just as much as the rest of us do.

    Je prierai pour vous. (Je préfère parler français.)

  47. I personally am a non-believer in Christianity, yet I have nothing against it. I believe Christianity and Science can co-exist; it all depends on this “faith” that people have. However, what I would like to know from the Christians here is why do Christians preach and attempt to convert non-believer into Christians? I certainly do not see believers of other religions preach as much as Christians. If we have already made it very clear that we do not believe in Christianity, do not want to be salvaged, whatever, why can’t we be left alone? Isn’t respecting other religions a virtue that should be observed (even by Christians)?

  48. Yes, i do try to help others to believe even when they say that they dont want to be saved. you ask why i would do this….if your friend wanted to commit suicide and asked you to leave him/her alone, would you?

  49. Then I believe you are wrong in making comparisons between committing suicide and not believing in God. I don’t see the connection at all.

  50. Theres this dud called Charlie who commented ages ago. I d just like 2 say that i agree with u but u really need 2 get a grip. U cant go around slandering other peoples religons. I mean all the arguments u put forward totally made sense and were great but u could have been a bit nicer about it. personally im an atheist who doesnt believe in God but doesnt feel the need to tell everyone else that they are dumasses cause theyre not. They just have different views

  51. First of all, i havent believed in god my whole life and i have basically all i could have hoped for. Why live your life doing someone elses will? Life would have no purpose if that was the case. Personally i have nothing against people who believe in religion, but when they try to impress their opinion onto me it really ticks me off. Every one has the right to make their own choices in life.

  52. charlie…i agree with you in full. What a fucking joke reilgion is. All of it is a croc of shit. Eventuall science will shut u churchie fucks up.

  53. you know it’s people like you that start wars over religion, so shut up untill you have somthing to say that doesn’t prove you’re an asshole.

  54. thank you Brad. i fully agree….lawsy, you need to learn some manners or no one will ever even take the time to consider your views. all we see is someone who cant control himself.

  55. GOD IS NOT REAL. ANYONE WHO BELIEVES IN GOD IS A DILLUSION FUCK WIT THAT SHOULD STAB THEM-SELVES IN THE ARM. i honestly cant understand how anyone could believe in god science just fucks most theories up. and BRIA no-one wants to hear your opinion and IF U DIED NO-ONE WOULD CARE BECAUSE YOUR WORTHLESS.



  58. have you enjoyed talking to yourself? you can say as many hateful things as you wish but i will not fight fire with fire.


  60. u are all fkn gay serioulsy…why would u spend all your time on this gay site debating if god is real or not…its fukin obvious…of course hes not


  62. you religious fkers make me sick.. if your satisfied ur going to heaven why don’t you kill urselves now and suck gods fat dick

  63. hey bria, you got to love how stupid these people are to go as low as to insult our intellegance when they can’t even spell the “fucking” eh? i don’t know about the rest of you, but that just kills me with laughter. and the arrogance calling themselves smarter then some one they know nothing about.
    and now a note for all you crazy bastards that seem to live to put down those with opposing views. shut up, now, cuase this is getting stupid, and i think my IQ went down just reading that. as i always say, “if you have nothing to say, say nothing”

  64. haha i love you brad! that was great and exactly how i feel! the funniest thing is that they called me “fat” and i’ve never had a fat day in my entire life. and if they notice….i’m not online all day, i get on at night. if they think this argument is so stupid, why are they here? they really don’t know how to prove a point or influence me at all! the more i read what they say, the more i know God must exist.

  65. and btw, no one with a “triple degree in biology and chem” would speak the way you do. plus, that most definitely doesn’t mean you are smarter, just older.

  66. -God is said to be all-powerful and omniscient and absolutely loving.
    -God is said to have created Adam and Eve and everything.
    -If God created evil, then God is malevolent and not absolutely loving.
    -If God simply made the world imperfectly, then he is incompetent, and not all-powerful and omniscient.

    Think about it and see if you can come up with an answer that doesn’t lead to God being incompetent or malevolent or that doesn’t contradict the views of God.

  67. God did create everything and God is Love. Evil is simply the LACK OF LOVE. it’s kinda like how black isn’t a color, it’s the lack of reflecting pigments. God had made a perfect world but adam and eve couldn’t follow the only rule they were given. We’re living here because we need to be challenged and make our own good choices. we need to show love and strength even through troubles. God didn’t want to force us to be loving and perfect. Life is a very short test and eternity in heaven is the reward.

  68. BRIA, i agree with you totally, when i was reading along i was thinking the same argument, well besides that, the whole study of science is the study of things we dont totally and completely understand, even though we can come to conclusions does not mean they are right. Also a question to those of you who believe evolution to be totally true, what is the most recent ancestor of man acoording to evolution, i think its the neandorthal, and whatever comes up ill research whether it was evolution, just a man with adaptations, or some stupid archaoligist(pardon the spelling if its wrong) making wrong conclusions.

  69. why dont bria and brad go lick there own arses!
    u must know eachother in real life because u are so far up bria’s arse brad it aint funny! i believe brad thinks that bria is god! and vthe way u talk brad its like u take dick in ur arse!

  70. hey, i am new to this site but reading over the arguements i fully agree with bria and i think all your arguements r awesum and u have said nothing wrong. (unlike lawsy) that absolute wanker. but brad u should say nething because it is clear to me that u dont understand what the others have written when i read your replies!

  71. i love u bria your awesum.
    brad needs to think about what he says as he makes no sense and his arguements are ridiculous which shows me his full intelligence!

  72. thank you for your support james!! even if brad didnt always make sense, he seems like a very nice person. i can deal with someone who doesnt agree with me, but most of the people on this site are so rude. they cuss and make inappropriate comments like that’s going to make me respect their opinions!!! where are you from james? u can IM me sometime if u want to talk. 🙂 i would like to hear some of your views.

  73. brad what were you talking about before you make no fucking sence and i fucking hate u. get a fucking life, and just in case you were thinking i liked you,think again. you have no chance with me because your a fucking loser
    i love lawsie (my sex god)

  74. and i think he made it pretty clear that its lawsy doing that. these people are imature. if anyone wants to discuss religion vs science with me, who has a respectable opinion, IM me at i3itch317 or email me at

  75. How in the world do you believe in creation and evolution? You’re taking all of the glory away from God. Plus there really is no point arguing with people who make fun of and totally reject God? They’re all blinded and don’t want to see the light. I pray that you also truly find Jesus and finally see the light because I think you are lost yourself. You need more faith girl. Give it all to God and He will show you the light.

  76. I’m not lost at all. I believe in God AND evolution. One does not disprove the other. I believe that God created all things on this earth. However, we do not fully understand the Bible. I think many things in it are more symbolic than we believe. I have strong faith in God. If i didn’t, i wouldnt see the purpose in life. At the same time, there is solid evidence of the evolution of many creatures. This is NOT contradictory to the Bible. I’ve never read that organisms can’t change. Basically, I don’t think that scientists, Christians, or anyone else knows how the earth originated. I believe that Genesis contains the truth, but it’s a truth we don’t fully understand. As humans, we are incapable of comprehending all of the wonders of God. After this life has passed, all questions will be answered.

  77. Kay, i agree that there is no point in arguing with people who refuse to see the truth. It’s a waste of time and energy. It won’t do anyone any good. Hopefully they will see when they are ready.

    I don’t appreciate you telling me that i need more faith or that I’m lost. this is not for your judgement.

  78. hey we are som skool kids who need to do a debate and we were wondering if anyone had any arguements that could assist us in proving that god is not real??? wb asap if u do. greatly appreciated steve!

  79. bria i am rebuting what you said in number 65 up on the page. You say “What is a day to god” i was reading a religious site that said how great god was and they said that he created the universe in six 24 hour days!!!!!!!!!!! So why dont all the christians make sure they have the same storys so it is belivable.

  80. i believe that the Bible is symbolistic. Creation may not have occured in what we, as humans, consider 6 days. If scientists “stuck to the same story” then we wouldn’t have conflicting arguments over causes of pollution, evolutionary trees, the Big Bang Theory, different diets, etc.

  81. Hi

    I have some questions that I’m seeking some answers to. I’m trying to get as many opinions and answers on these questions as I can get, so even if you are not aware of various answers regarding a question, your opinion is still appreciated. If you, or if you know of anyone who can answer some of these questions please have them respond to me. The questions cover such topics as gravity, speed of light, light itself, atoms, mathematical equations, and living organisms.


    1. Of the planets that are big as the earth would they have gravity that is equal to the earth’s gravity every time?

    2. How does the spin or the tilt of a planet affect its gravity? If two planets were the same size, same tilt, and same speed through space, but had different spin speeds on their axis, would the planet with the faster spin have the strongest gravitational pull?

    3. If two planets were the same size, same spin speed, and same speed through space, but had different tilts on their axis, would the planet with the larger tilt have the strongest gravitational pull?

    4. If two planets were of equal size, exact tilt, and exact spin speed, but moved through open space at different speeds, would the one that moved through open space fastest have the strongest gravitational pull?

    5. Can the speed of a planet in open space be measured, and would the planet’s speed always be relative to the observer’s reference position?

    6. Can a planet’s atomic makeup in any way aid or increase the strength of its gravitational field? Say there was a planet the exact same in proportion, speeds, and tilts as the Earth, but the planet was made up of pure magnetite. Would that planet have a stronger gravitational pull than the Earth?

    7. In reference to question # 6, would the magnetite makeup and magnetic field of the planet cause it to pull certain objects to itself at a speed faster than its gravitational field could pull-in those objects?

    8. In reference to # 6, do all planets have both a gravitational field and a magnetic field based upon their atomic makeup? If they do, how would the two different fields affect each other, and how would they interact to pull objects to itself?

    9. Is it possible that gravity is not actually caused by a body warping the fabric of space around it as Einstein suggested, but instead it is caused by the types of atoms that make up the planet? In this scenario size does also matter as a bigger magnet has a stronger magnetic pull than a smaller magnet does?

    10. Does a positively charged atom attract all negatively charged particles to it at a particular or constant speed regardless of the size of mass of the negatively charged particle?

    11. Does a negatively charged atom attract all positively charged particles to it at a particular or constant speed regardless of the size or mass of the positively charged particle?

    12. Could planets in orbit around other planets and stars really just be sharing electrons at the boundaries of their gravitational or magnetic fields in the same way atoms do, and that is what sustains their orbits?

    13. Do atoms in solid objects ever bond and then orbit around each other while being held in place by their bonds?

    14. Is it possible that planets can only establish orbits in relation to each other indefinitely if one has at first some kind of a positive charge and one at first has some kind of a negative charge?

    15. Is it ever possible for two large objects in space to ever repel each other at their boundaries of their magnetic or gravitational fields?

    16. Just as objects at certain speeds can penetrate neutral, positively charged or negatively charged atoms and bypass those atoms magnetic or gravitational fields (particle accelerators). Is that what happens when meteors or comets penetrate the magnetic or gravitational field of a planet or a sun?

    17. If electrically charged atoms pull particles of the opposite charge to it at a constant rate, then is the source of this gravitational pull their charge, or is the source of the gravitational pull the warping of the fabric of space by their mass?

    Speed and the Speed of Light

    1. Since there is no particular point in reality or space that any human being can designate with certainty as standing still or as the “center standing still point” of the universe. Nor is there a “standing still point” that one could line an object up with to use as a reference to measure the correct speed of another object. This would be necessary before the actual and correct true speed of another object can be found in relation to the object that is oriented as standing still. Would you agree it is impossible to know the point in space that is actually standing still? And does this paragraph overall make sense to you?

    2. Without the ability to give some kind of measurement for time it would be impossible to come up with any kind of scenario to calculate speed or measure speed by. In our present scenarios of calculating speed we need to know about some measurement of time and some measurement of length (distance). The amount of time it takes to cover that distance computes the speed of the object. However when computing the speed of that object in relation to a reference point that is moving rather than standing still, the speed of the other object becomes relative to different moving reference points, as Einstein has said? Do you agree with the above statements?

    3. Do you agree with this statement? No one knows the exact speeds of any parts of the universe as no one knows the standing still point in the universe by which to accurately measure the speed of anything moving in the universe?

    4. In reference to question # 3, In other words we may think we know the speed of the earth moving through space, but if space itself is moving at a particular speed that we do not know, then we can not add that variable into our equation to determine the exact speed of the earth?

    5. Could the speed of space and the speed of the supposed expanding universe be the same thing, or could they actually be two different things? Could the expanding universe be traveling at a certain speed while it is expanding at the same time?
    6. In summary so speed is always an inaccurate calculation as no one knows the standing still point of creation, but it also is always relative to a particular objects reference point. But having said this if two people agree as to which of the two objects to reference from in determining the speed, velocity, or acceleration of another object then their calculations will always agree. Speed, velocity, and acceleration is always relative to a person’s reference point, but once two or more people agree on which reference point to use in their measurements then from that reference point the measurements of speed, velocity, and acceleration will always be absolute within it’s particular system? Do you agree with these statements?

    7. How do planes compute their speeds in relation to open space, as they cannot compute it in the same way a car can that is attached to the ground and covering a certain distance in a certain time. Planes are traveling through the air and there are no mile markers up in the atmosphere, and even though a plane may know the distance a car travels to get to a different point, that distance would not be the same for a plane to get to that same point as it is traveling through the air and not on land? So how do planes compute their speeds?

    8. Since the speed of an object cannot ever be calculated precisely even by a car as the earth is spinning and also moving through space? Is there a way for any moving object to accurately predict its speed for itself without knowing the exact speed of the universe or certain objects within it? Could mankind use the vibrations of atoms at certain speeds as a measurement to the true speed of an object? Do atoms vibrate faster or slower at higher speeds? Can mankind convert certain vibrational speeds of atoms into certain mph or mps? Could atoms be used to create a device which would be the best method and reference point for measuring the speed of any object in the universe?

    Speed of Light questions

    9. If light has the right to travel at a particular speed independent of the speed of the source or the observer as Einstein has postulated. Then why can’t other objects in motion have the right to move at a particular speed independent of the source or the observer. It’s the same thing. It’s illogical for one particular speed to have that right and not all others?

    10. In reference to question # 8, I a person taking off from a planet travels toward our earth. When he finally sees the sun’s light approaching him, then if his spaceship is traveling 180,000 mps, then to him the light approaching him and passing through him is traveling at 366,000 mps. Is this correct or not?

    11. In the alternative a new star is created and at its moment of creation an alien spacecraft from its location takes off at 186,000mps in the same direction as the speed of light. To him the speed of light is traveling at 0 mps in relation to him, is this correct or not?
    12. If mass increases as an object approaches the speed of light does that mean that a spaceship would get bigger along with all the people and objects in it as it approached the speed of light? If that is true, does it mean they would shrink back to their regular size gradually as the ship slowed down to a lot slower speeds?

    13. If photons travel at the speed of light and time supposedly slows down at the speed of light, does that mean that photons are in a slower time dimension than the earth and people on it who are showered by photons of light everyday?

    14. If the mass of an object increases as it approaches the speed of light at what point would 51% of the energy beings used to push the object go to increasing it’s mass, and only 49% go to increasing it’s speed?

    15. If photons or light is created by the nucleus of atoms. Then once they are created and injected from a standing still position from within the atom, don’t they have to have a small period of acceleration before they reach the speed of light? Doesn’t any object from a starting point have to accelerate to reach a certain speed it’s trying to obtain?

    16. If it’s possible to slow time down but keep speed and distance constant. Or in other words if time can slow down without affecting the speed of an object, then the distance covered by that object in a certain period of time can be increased, thereby in an indirect way increasing the objects speed? Would you agree with this statement if it was true that time itself could be slowed down?

    17. In reference to question # 6, then if time actually does slow down as the speed of an object increases, then that means that speed does not increase at a constant rate within time, for as an object gets faster and faster in time, then time enables the objects speed to become faster and faster as time slows down without the object having to accelerate to increase its speed? Would you agree with this statement if it were true that time could slow down in reality?

    18. Supposedly length shortens in the direction of the movement as one approaches the speed of light. Is this a situation where actually say the molecules of the spaceship get closer together thereby shrinking the length of the ship some? Or are we saying that the ship doesn’t actually shrink, but just appears that way to the human eye because of the ships fast speed? Which one are we talking about or are both true?

    19. If the ship actually shrinks in length as its molecules get closer together at fast speeds, then doesn’t that contradict the view that as an objects speed approaches the speed of light that its mass gets bigger?

    20. Is it possible that at higher speeds, time slowing down is really a mirage caused by friction affecting the molecules of a substance and its force fields at such high speeds thereby causing all processes to slow down from human molecules to the molecules in a man made clock?
    Questions on the Atom

    1. Is it true that atoms can be said to make up two distinct categories in reality, and those categories are living matter (life), and non-living matter?

    2. How many different kinds of atoms are there presently known to man?

    3. Which is the smallest atom? Which is the largest atom? What is the difference in their two sizes?

    4. What is light in relation to the atom? Is everything made up of light or is everything made up of atoms?

    5. What parts of the atom are still presently only theorized to exist, but haven’t actually been detected yet in particle accelerators? Are quarks still presently only theorized to exist?

    6. Can a single atom ever disappear all together by any process? If it can disappear what is actually happening, does it turn into unseen energy in space or something else?

    7. Can two atoms colliding in a particle accelerator create 3 or more atoms of equal size?

    8. When atoms collide in a particle accelerator is it possible for particles to appear that are in anyway smaller than the original particles that collided, please give an example if possible? Or do all the atoms of the collision end up being the same size as the particles that collided?

    9. What happens when you collide two particles and one of the particles is bigger than the other? Will the particles created by the collision be random with some the exact size as the big particle, and others the exact size as the smaller particle, please explain?

    10. When atoms collide can they sometimes produce a particle larger than the two atoms that originally collided?

    11. What creates what we know as “light”, please explain?
    12. If energy can be neither created nor destroyed, then why in the version of the “open universe” would the universe eventually reach a point where all protons eventually decay and the universe becomes a cold-near vacuum made up of dead stars and galaxies?

    13. Say hypothetically according to e=mc2 that it was possible to covert all matter in the universe into energy. In theory, which could never happen, that means if the mechanism was available someone could convert the entire universe into pure energy with no matter in it at all. Is it probably safe to say that matter and energy are perfectly balanced by some force in the universe so that if energy became 51% and matter was 49%, that the 1% of energy would just miraculously convert itself into 1% of matter to keep things balanced?

    14. What determines when energy can burst into matter creating an atom out of nothing, rather than just being absorbed into some matter or atoms that already exist? Does energy ever burst into an atom out of nothing in our present universe?

    15. When an elementary particle disappears in a particle accelerator, does it disappear into energy that is then later absorbed by another atom somewhere, or what actually happens to it when it disappears?

    16. Is it true that of the 200 or so subatomic particles detected that only the photon, electron, neutrino, and proton are stable, and that all others decay?

    Physics and Living organisms

    1. Niels Bohr, Max Delbruck, and Stent hoped to discover new laws of physics, hitherto unknown, that would supply physical and chemical explanations for the functions peculiar to life. Is it still true that in physics as of yet that no such laws have turned up?

    2. Entities capable of converting energy into organization are not predictable from the laws established by classical physics. This suggested to Schrodinger that organisms stand outside physics in some essential respect; or else that physics contains additional principles that pertain to organisms, which remain to be discovered. Do you agree with the above statement?

    3. Has mankind detected any kind or forms of life beyond the earth’s gravitational force field? Has mankind detected any kind of micro-organisms or organisms of any type in space or on any planet that we presently know about besides Earth?

    4. Do you think that the fact that not even a single micro-organism has been discovered on another planet supports the fact that God exists, and that evolution is not the creator of life? In other words until God decides to create life on any particular planet, then life will not exist there even in the form of a micro-organism of any type?

    5. Is the following statement overall true? Humans are capable of detecting and discovering the different types of atoms in existence, but they are powerless to take the atoms that they know make up a certain object such as a tree, and then build a tree in the laboratory or elsewhere? Even so with that knowledge humans are powerless also to build water, a rock, an animal body, or a human body. They may be able to tamper with such things to a certain degree, which might lead to certain variations of those things in some way, but they are powerless to build such things themselves from ground up.

    6. Is the following statement true? All humans can do is learn to exert a certain kind of force on some of those objects or things in such a way that they can convert certain solid things into a liquid, or vice versa, and certain liquid things into a gas or vice versa. They also have the ability to learn to use atoms to produce electricity in various forms for human use, and to invent certain technologies, constructions, and devices in life from the things that atoms make up, but humans can in no way build a tree, rock, plant, or human body from the ground up. It appears that only nature (evolution) or God presently has that capability. Would you agree with this statement?

    7. Do you agree with the following statement? Once scientists and physicists reached the level of reality where “certainty” ceased to be a possible explanation for how the world operates at its basic level, they became aware that some force besides “certainty mechanistic deductionism” ruled the universe, and not only rules it but rules it in a way that scientists cannot predict or observe with any accuracy. Is it true now since this point has been reached that both physicists and scientists, whether they want to admit to it or not, are only left with two possibilities for the origin of life: 1) infinite chance with infinite explanations rules the universe, or 2) There is a God, and He rules it. Is it true that there are only two options left after the knowledge of the sub-atomic realm, with its “uncertainty principle” and “probability principle”, is reached. Do you agree with this statement?

    8. In support of # 7 above. If there is always an explanation for everything then that means that scientists and physicists are on a never-ending quest or loop whether they choose to acknowledge it or not. Because even when they think they have found the M-
    Theory of everything. The question will then arise, “All right but where did that “thing” that answers “everything” come from itself. And if they find the “thing” that that “thing” came from, then they will have to find the “thing” that the “thing” it came from came from, and so on, and so on. Do you agree with this statement?

    Questions on Mathematics and Equations

    1. Can equations that work in theory and logic be made up for things and situations that don’t actually exist in our reality? In other words a physicist might think that a particular object or phenomena exists, and make up an equation that logically explains the thing or situation, when in actual reality the “thing” or “phenomena” doesn’t actually exist, even though the equation that describes the non-existent thing is logical and gives some kind of verifiable results that can be repeated?

    2. In support of question # 1 I quote Brian Greene from his book, “When physicist studied the equations of any one of the five string theories, they found that they do have many solutions – for example, many different possible ways to curl up the extra dimensions – with each solution corresponding to a universe with different properties. Most of these universes, although emerging as valid solutions to the equations of string theory, appear to be irrelevant to the world as we know it”. From this statement is it possible that scientists and physicists could be passing as a “fact” of life or reality a particular “equation” that in actuality does not represent reality at all even though it is a logical equation that can be repeated by others?

    Any insights anyone has on the above questions will be greatly appreciated.


    Mike Ledbetter

  82. I was different to read some of the opinion on religon, however I have one of my own and it may be siminlar to most of the commits but I believe in God and that he created all of us here on earth. I believe also that their a heaven and a hell. The ones that believe in God and live according to the Lords will are the ones who will enter the pearly Gates of Heaven. And those who chose to do other wise will be the ones the enter the hole of fire forever. Now theres no need to argue over this because it’s already plan to see, Those who chose to argue that are the ones that need to get it understood and get themselves straight and follow God.

  83. And it if is plain to see, they why would there even be reason to agrue. clearly, it is not obvious, that is why you people have to use the ‘faith’ argument all the damn time.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.