• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

There must be a Creator

Lackasham said:
Putting my religious beliefs aside, I am 100% convinced there must be a creator of some sort. Humans, animals, really anything living is proof to me. Here are the things that convince me of this

1) the fact that we live in an environment perfect for our survival
2) the complexity of the human body and it's processes
3) the spark of life

What causes something to live? A person is just a ratio of certain elements why can we not replicate it scientifically? Answer IMO: Creator
Click to expand...

Your convinced based on what evidence? There is no evidence of a creator but there is evidence of evolution.

#1 Space is vast. No one knows just how vast. I believe that space or "area" is infinitely "vast". If area is boundless imagine what possibilities exist within. For all we know there could be a billion earths (a little gay but fuck it. but fuck it... rofl)

#2 The theory of evolution. It's actually very simple to comprehend. Although in my opinion the time frame in which we have evolved on earth doesn't seem realistic it is still possible. Read about it and it might put your mind at ease. DRAGONS!!

#3 Not sure where to go with this...

What causes something to live is basically the same as building a complex machine. The machine is simply made of matter (does that piss you off Jesus?).
 
^Why would it piss off Jesus?

Isnt all matter energy? Is energy a vibration? In what? Is it strings- us, and everything? Must it be resonant, within a system, to be- to be allowed? Does this not deliver credence to any idea?

You may provide challenge. I need refinement. Help me.
 
Last edited:
I once read in a theoretical physics book, when talking about the standard model and such (formula to describe everything, meaning literally everything) that there is an incalculably HUGE number of variables where if any single one of them was changed even just slightly, life would not be possible anywhere in the universe. The probability of every single one of these seemingly infinite variables randomly ending up exactly how they need to be in order for life to be possible is quite literally INcredible.

That being said, I do not believe in an all knowing, all powerful god/being that created the universe. What I believe is that before our universe existed, there was nothing but energy. Pure source energy, or pure consciousness. Existing as nothing but energy. I don't believe this energy to be a god, in the sense that it is a being separate from ourselves that decided to create us and the universe - I believe that we ARE this source energy. All of us are. Everything is, actually. And the universe exists merely as a way of experiencing. In quantum physics, there are ways they have proven that events only happen if observed. Basically repeat ale experiments have shown different results when someone or something observes it happening. Don't ask me how, just read about theoretical physics/metaphysics/quantum physics, etc if you are interested. I wouldn't know how to put it into words properly. Anyway, this, coupled with all of the buddhist literature i have read and everything i have read and seen relating to spiritual sciences has lead me to this belief. We were't created by god as a sperate entity, and we are not separate entities from each other for that matter. Everything is god. I am god, you are god, we are all god. We are all part of the same "source energy" merely experiencing for the sake of experiencing. We are all creators, as well as creations. We build things, we grow things, we morph metals and extract minerals and synthesize chemicals and we come together in love to create new life. And at the same time, all of us were created by our parents. We are all intimately connected in the sense that we all exist from the same source energy, and we are truly all one not just each other but with the universe.
 
What 23 said:
^Why would it piss off Jesus?

Isnt all matter energy? Is energy a vibration? In what? Is it strings- us, and everything? Must it be resonant, within a system, to be- to be allowed? Does this not deliver credence to any idea?

You may provide challenge. I need refinement. Help me.
Click to expand...

Thank you for going where I dared not to... You are my jesus... can i suck you? ROFL

and i say that being completely against the goomba revolution
 
Last edited:
i think that the things that make up atoms are made up of other things that are even smaller. Or some other form of invisible shit exists that can make extremely small nano bots (smaller than nano) that microscopes can't see...
 
lets get back to the point though. op thinks there is god.

The big bang theory proves there is no god because life cannot survive a big bang. The only other possible explanation for live on earth is a) life naturally evolved or b) life naturally evolved ages ago (possibly on another planet) and we are the creation of the nano bots that they left behind... Or they could still exist and are firing out comets and meteors with there technology in it misting the whole universe.

Jesus can suck me...
 
psychlopath said:
The big bang theory proves there is no god because life cannot survive a big bang.
Click to expand...

Using the Big Bang theory to justify your position makes it inherently weak. The Big Bang is a theory, it is not proven. Not by any stretch. There is a consensus that it happened, like there is a consensus humans are causing global warming, but a consensus is not proof. I don't know the origins of the physical universe, I don't claim to, but what I do know is that the Big Bang theory is the most absurd shite to ever be proposed by science. It is essentially a scientific creation story to replace a religious creation story. We can do better than that.. by just admitting we don't know and that we should continue to investigate.

Second, what makes you think life is limited to the physical dimension, or that there is only the material dimension/universe?

Again, I think there is enough reason to suspect some kind of architect or master planner of some kind. The problem is people can't imagine an intelligence without projecting a human-like type of intelligence on top of it. That and the fact that no one likes to consider the possibility they're pawns or puppets in a play of something greater than themselves.. humans are quite self-centered and demanding to be the top dog.
 
-=SS=- said:
Using the Big Bang theory to justify your position makes it inherently weak. The Big Bang is a theory, it is not proven. Not by any stretch. There is a consensus that it happened, like there is a consensus humans are causing global warming, but a consensus is not proof. I don't know the origins of the physical universe, I don't claim to, but what I do know is that the Big Bang theory is the most absurd shite to ever be proposed by science. It is essentially a scientific creation story to replace a religious creation story. We can do better than that.. by just admitting we don't know and that we should continue to investigate.
Click to expand...
you seem to have trouble understanding the basics of scientific method.

you think that the big bang is shite. great, that's an opinion to which you are entitled.

the big bang is a scientific theory which is currently widely accepted because it's the model we have which is most consistent with our observations of the universe.

the very nature of science, the basis on which it operates, is "we don't know and we're continuing to investigate".
-=SS=- said:
Again, I think there is enough reason to suspect some kind of architect or master planner of some kind. The problem is people can't imagine an intelligence without projecting a human-like type of intelligence on top of it.
Click to expand...
some people can and some people can't.
-=SS=- said:
That and the fact that no one likes to consider the possibility they're pawns or puppets in a play of something greater than themselves.
Click to expand...
that fails the idiot test at the first hurdle. plenty of people consider that.
-=SS=- said:
humans are quite self-centered and demanding to be the top dog.
Click to expand...
i hope the irony of this statement is not lost on you?

alasdair
 
-=SS=- said:
Using the Big Bang theory to justify your position makes it inherently weak. The Big Bang is a theory, it is not proven. Not by any stretch. There is a consensus that it happened, like there is a consensus humans are causing global warming, but a consensus is not proof. I don't know the origins of the physical universe, I don't claim to, but what I do know is that the Big Bang theory is the most absurd shite to ever be proposed by science. It is essentially a scientific creation story to replace a religious creation story. We can do better than that.. by just admitting we don't know and that we should continue to investigate.
Click to expand...

I agree... on big bang seems kinda stupid but it does expand the mind. I think that there are a whole bunch of big bangs... ROFL

The fuckin universseee maaannnn... its likee... a bunch of water droplets maaannn that likee uhhh plooppp together... err.. err... err... and then like POP for no reasonnnn... SUCK US!!!

The sickest shit I ever thought of was that the theory of evolution, if correct, means dragons could actually exist!
 
Last edited:
alasdairm said:
the big bang is a scientific theory which is currently widely accepted because it's the model we have which is most consistent with our observations of the universe.
Click to expand...

No. It's widely accepted because people just trust authority, and the scientific authority figures and establishment say it's true, therefore it is. Got nothing to do with being consistent with observations. Actual observations prove otherwise; the universe is not expanding as was assumed by using red-shift. Actual observation has clearly shown quasars with massively different red-shift values than those of the larger galaxy they're connected to. Halton Arp documented many of these, a seasoned astronomer and past assistant to Hubble himself.

When he presented this evidence he was denounced because it clearly alluded to many long held notions being incorrect, the Big Bang being one of them. He lost his prestige, the ability to be published in journals, and importantly to him his telescope time at the institution he worked at. Again, it has nothing to do with being "consistent with observation". The data has been available for a long time, collected by a very respected and highly seasoned astronomer who knew his shit. It has to do with dogmatic fucks in positions of power who are unwilling to embrace change.

Man-made global warming isn't consistent with observation/actual data either, and yet again the vast majority of people accept the consensus. In this case you even get called a 'denier' now. I have no time for bullshit consensus. Science should be about the science, not what you want to believe.
 
psychlopath said:
lets get back to the point though. op thinks there is god.

The big bang theory proves there is no god because life cannot survive a big bang. The only other possible explanation for live on earth is a) life naturally evolved or b) life naturally evolved ages ago (possibly on another planet) and we are the creation of the nano bots that they left behind... Or they could still exist and are firing out comets and meteors with there technology in it misting the whole universe.

Jesus can suck me...
Click to expand...

Battlestar Galactica? Good show.

Your first sentence I fail to see the sense. How does the big bang "prove" no God exists? What "God", that doesn't exist, are we talking about?

I know there is a God.
 
Last edited:
-=SS=- said:
No. It's widely accepted because people just trust authority, and the scientific authority figures and establishment say it's true, therefore it is. Got nothing to do with being consistent with observations. Actual observations prove otherwise; the universe is not expanding as was assumed by using red-shift. Actual observation has clearly shown quasars with massively different red-shift values than those of the larger galaxy they're connected to. Halton Arp documented many of these, a seasoned astronomer and past assistant to Hubble himself.
Click to expand...

Yeah and for all we know authority is a dumb piece of shit IDIOT! These fuckers have never been into space so how do "we" even know that space exists? For all we know the sky is an illusion and there might actually really be god!
 
What 23 said:
How does the big bang "prove" no God exists?
Click to expand...

I said that...

Ummm... God is proven not to exist because god is supposedly the creator of humanity and life on earth. All gods in all religions are described as being man like and the ones who brought life into existence and that we must worship and obey their commands. If the big bang happened / is going to happen again and again then this disproves that god exists and proves the theory of evolution.

Now if by god you mean the ultimate being (life form) or something very close to it I would have to say that you are right. I might consider this being to be god but it is simply a product of evolution.

On another note science is starting to probe into other forms of matter as we satisfy our desire to understand the unknown. I think that it may be possible that invisible shit exists but I have never believed that this invisible shit that can move through matter is a life form.
 
You need to take a shower. You've been ROFL alllll day.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top