That's right, you're the ones who believe that in the beginning there was nothing. AND THEN IT EXPLODED!!? Hee hee!
43 comments
This shows total ignorance of Cosmology, Abiogenesis, and Evolution. It wins a triple "F" for utter failure.
You are implicitly referring to the concept of "Conservation of Energy" which applies only to a physical system that is time invariant. An expanding Universe is not bound by any such law. Look it up in "Classical Mechanics" by Herbert Goldstein.
Males and females did not appear by magic. Sexuality, like all other biological characteristics evolved over time. In the early world of Archaea and Bacteria, segments of DNA were routinely exchanged by very different organisms. This still happens today among these two domains, and is largely responsible for the evolution of multiple antibiotic resistance. Eventually, a symbiotic event took place resulting in cells with nuclei. Many of these still still exchange DNA by means of some rather sophisticated but non-sexual mating processes.
Mitosis evolved into union followed by union & meiosis where haploid cells came together forming a diploid cell, swapped chromosomes, and then split apart. Originally, the union state was brief and the organisms split immediately into haploid state. Eventually, at least in more complex organisms, the diploid state became dominant. Then asymmetry developed between the haploid cells, where one haploid cell was larger and the other more mobile. And THAT was the origin of sexuality.
Do you understand? Probably not.
But you believe that first there was nothing, then there was light, THEN the Sun and moon, THEN the Earth, THEN the people, who magically are created knowing everything they need to know because a couple of isolated folk named everything. But apparently no, because everyone just vanished or something and we're not interested in anyone other than these two people, who apparently are ancestors of the whole of China. Then, a little later on, we get a big flood, and we have some guy take two of each known animal on a giant wooden boat. Except the flood isn't big enough to have an effect, and the area being so flooded that the boat ends up on a MOUNTAIN means that the Americas (which are NOWHERE NEAR THE LOCATION OF THE STORY) are almost completely covered. Except that when we finally get to them...what? 4500 years later?...we find out that there's no evidence of such a flood ever occurring. After that, the population somehow grows from somewhere around 8 to 250,000,000 in just 350 years (by your count). Also, they would have to go to both the Americas and Australasia just to unload the native folk, since both those countries would have likely been decimated.
Has anyone else noticed these idiots always start with the premise that the Earth is adapted to human existence as though we predate the dirt and remain unchanging rather than life shaping to make use of what elements are present? You know, the absolute opposite of the premise of evolutionary adaptation and any common bloody sense?
If the universe requires an intelligent creator, then how can this creator exist without a creator of its own, and how can the creator of the creator of the universe exist without its own creator, and how can the creator of the creator of the creator of the universe exist without...?
Moreover, how is the appearance of an intelligent creator without an intelligent creator of its own any less "magical" or "far-fetched" than the appearance of the universe without one? If an intelligent creator of the universe never "appeared" because it was always there in the first place (i.e. it is eternal), then what makes the possession of that eternalness any less "magical" or "far-fetched" than the appearance of the universe without the aid of an intelligent creator?
These are legitimate questions, not an attempt to patronize. If you interpret them that way, then look to yourself for the answer why. The level of superciliousness and insolence you display can only be the product of a profoundly and willfully ignorant mind. The pursuit of knowledge is also the pursuit of humility; acquiring knowledge reveals just how much of it one lacks .
BTW, your petulant and condescending attitude doesn't make me angry. If anything, I find it mildly amusing, and I can't help but wonder what you're trying to accomplish with it or whether it's helping.
It's pretty good that this is the last Trump; we don't need or want any more blithering idiots like this one.
In the beginning there was a singularity and then it expanded.
I'm no biologist, so I guess, but hermaphroditism probably came first, after asexual reproduction. Then the ones who mutated into only one sex were more prosperous than the ones who had to sustain both sexes at once.
The ones who couldn't find enough food and/or water died out, silly-nilly. That's what natural selection is all about.
Who created the Creator? What was his purpose?
We pity you for believing that the magic account of Creation is in any way plausible or real. It's soooo tragic.
For years they've tried to define The Big Bang Theory and the Theory Of Evolution down to it's simpliest more fairy tale mystical terms possible.
So they could get them on the same playing field as their stupid plagiarized myth. It's weird when you belittle something by comparing it to your own ridiculous beliefs but when your beliefs are indeed so outrageously stupid you have no other choice. " Heh, they believe everything was just magically produced and that water just magically fit the puddles, dumb scientists!"
It's crazy that you believe the God of the Bible created everything when he himself is a proven creation of other myths and legends stolen from previous cultures.
> there just HAPPENED to be enough food and water available to sustain this completely accidental and purposeless explanation for Creation.
No, there wasn't enough. If there was, there'd be no competition, and by extension, far less natural selection.
Where did god come from?
image
Soooooo adorable!
Science never uses the word "magic." That's you creationists.
in the beginning there was nothing. AND THEN IT EXPLODED!!? Hee hee!
This is exactly the definition of biblical creationism. So adorable.
I love it when they become so mired and entrenched in their beliefs that they become totally unable to set aside their religious framework for thinking when dealing with non-religious matters. Then they wonder why they're unable to understand science and what they think they understand makes no fucking sense whatsoever.
Like the (rather ignorant) beliefs promoted by Christianity that nature is hierarchical with end goals, and that humans are the center of the world and everything exists for and is adapted to us. It's no wonder evolution makes no sense if you're unable to let go of these beliefs when trying to understand the theory. What really gets me is how fundies like the Last Chump here just assume everyone else thinks like this and share the exact same woeful misunderstanding of the theory that he has, but that they just accept it. It shows a hilarious lack of awareness and perspective. Rather like how small children think, now that I think about it.
...meanwhile, talking snakes, combustible bushes, and donkeys.
Well, that's me convinced. Where do I sign up for this fundie Christainity malarkey - based on a book so credible - and is the lobotomy included in the deal too, The Last Fart?! [/Doug Piranha-levels of sarcasm]
... you're the ones that believe that in the beginning there was nothing.
No, you're the ones who believe that in the beginning there was nothing. Creation ex nihilo.
@Everyone
The creator or creators could've been not a who,but a what. I mean the big bang and life it's self could've been the creators. We really don't who the creator/creators are or what they are. Someone( god, aliens or an entity), somebody(gods, aliens or entities) or something(the big bang itself and/or life it's self)
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
