Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

scientific reasons for believing in god? Watch

Announcements
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oblivion99)
    Arent you meant to be an helper?
    Eh? Is that relevant? I certainly helped that poster improve his English vocabulary.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by leavingthecity)
    I seeeeeeee

    I feel like this is something I don't know just because I'm old. At 25. Oh dear.
    You're not old.... 25 is still young.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangala)
    scientific, logical evidence which points towards the existence of god

    convert me from atheism
    Faith is not about fact or science. Faith is about belief. Belief in God, your parents, your lover, your best friend, anyone. Faith is just hope, and hope is so powerful in itself, you don't need science for faith.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Al-Qamar)
    I was being sarcastic...
    good to know
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by asmuse123)
    Faith is not about fact or science. Faith is about belief. Belief in God, your parents, your lover, your best friend, anyone. Faith is just hope, and hope is so powerful in itself, you don't need science for faith.
    that sounds like something from a shite romantic movie mate
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rtdsv)
    The Qur'an is unchanged since created 1400 years ago. The smallest chapter in the Qur'an is 10 words long and has over 40 rhetorical devices used. This is excluding other aspects such as its conciseness, phonetic superiority and informativity. This is outside the capacity of humans because no book or poem has more devices etc. and therefore could be considered a miracle.

    This isn't proof of its truth, but it is a factor that gives me faith to believe in God.

    Some people want a simple answer to the creation of the universe but this idea is so complicated how could it have one? Is it not possible that one thing cannot be comprehended by human intelligence and logic? This is just my opinion and like someone said it does take some faith.
    a book that you think is well-written is no proof of god or that the book itself is anything special
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangala)
    that sounds like something from a shite romantic movie mate
    [img]http://bayardandholmes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Meme-William-Shakespeare-*****-Summers-Day.jpg[/img]
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thisgalkate)
    The Earths size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter. Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life.

    And our moon is the perfect size and distance from the Earth for its gravitational pull. The moon creates important ocean tides and movement so ocean waters do not stagnate, and yet our massive oceans are restrained from spilling over across the continents.

    Water is colorless, odorless and without taste, and yet no living thing can survive without it. Plants, animals and human beings consist mostly of water (about two-thirds of the human body is water). You'll see why the characteristics of water are uniquely suited to life:

    The human brain processes more than a million messages a second. Your brain weighs the importance of all this data, filtering out the relatively unimportant. This screening function is what allows you to focus and operate effectively in your world. The brain functions differently than other organs. There is an intelligence to it, the ability to reason, to produce feelings, to dream and plan, to take action, and relate to other people.

    Astrophysicist Robert Jastrow, a self-described agnostic, stated, "The seed of everything that has happened in the Universe was planted in that first instant; every star, every planet and every living creature in the Universe came into being as a result of events that were set in motion in the moment of the cosmic explosion...The Universe flashed into being, and we cannot find out what caused that to happen."
    the fact that all of those things happen to be perfect for life to exist does not mean that god created it, it merely proves evolution.

    there are trillions and trillions of planets, it would be statistically almost impossible for at least one to not have the conditions which we find on earth. statistically, there should be many more too.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EC3)
    I'll try and explain more clearly. All matter is penetrable. The mind is impenetrable and given the lack of empirical evidence (which science depends on) it is not unreasonable to induce that the mind is therefore immaterial. Our material bodies are penetrable but he fact that a part of us (our minds) are impenetrable and subsequently immaterial suggests there's something else out there. Hence, answering the questions of reason to believe in God due to the fact that that something else out there could possibly be a spiritual deity or atleast the existence of the soul.

    Just saying that we may be able to observe the mind the mind the in the future doesn't change the fact that it's impossible at the current time (which is all we directly have to go with really) makes a belief in some sort of spiritual existence (if not just immaterial) reasonable.
    It makes it harder to argue with, but it doesn't make it at all reasonable. it's not like there's a 50% chance that god created the mind.

    by that logic, it's reasonable to assume that a 24 legged invisible pink dinosaur created the mind too because we cannot yet fully understand what the mind is
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangala)
    the fact that all of those things happen to be perfect for life to exist does not mean that god created it, it merely proves evolution.

    there are trillions and trillions of planets, it would be statistically almost impossible for at least one to not have the conditions which we find on earth. statistically, there should be many more too.
    Yes, the idea that these conditions are suited to life is beyond ridiculous, it's the other way round, life has managed to develop within these conditions. Planet earth is not a safe a friendly place. I'm sat by a window and am therefore being exposed to skin cell destroying UV light as I type. My skin is tanned, it's because my environment is so hostile that my body produces melanin to try and protect itself. (Um even though I'm in the UK)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I made a thread on logical and mathematical proofs...


    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...3#post62870493
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by leavingthecity)
    Yes, the idea that these conditions are suited to life is beyond ridiculous, it's the other way round, life has managed to develop within these conditions. Planet earth is not a safe a friendly place. I'm sat by a window and am therefore being exposed to skin cell destroying UV light as I type. My skin is tanned, it's because my environment is so hostile that my body produces melanin to try and protect itself. (Um even though I'm in the UK)
    No you aren't because if you are sat behind a window you are getting almost no UV because glass absorbs it. That is why you'll never ever get a tan that way.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pvaz6965)
    No you aren't because if you are sat behind a window you are getting almost no UV because glass absorbs it. That is why you'll never ever get a tan that way.
    I'll never get a tan, but I'll still be exposed to an amount (tiny) of UV radiation depending on it's wavelength, which determines whether it'll be absorbed by the glass or not. You are right, no need to wear SPF indoors as I am told by beauty magazines.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pvaz6965)
    No you aren't because if you are sat behind a window you are getting almost no UV because glass absorbs it. That is why you'll never ever get a tan that way.
    I misread this and skipped over 'almost' so essentially just rewrote what you said. Sorry. The tan is from my ethnic mix
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AmazingArry)
    You're not old.... 25 is still young.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I'll be nearly 30 when I'm out of uni. Ugh.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by leavingthecity)
    I'll be nearly 30 when I'm out of uni. Ugh.
    Why is that a bad thing? At any age you're still learning new things, discovering things. Age isn't and shouldn't be a barrier to what you can achieve

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=thisgalkate;62862755]The Earths size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter. Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life.[\QUOTE]

    This is utter rubbish.

    Mercury does have an atmosphere. It's very thin, but is comprised of mainly hydrogen, helium and oxygen with small amounts of water and some metals. The presence of hydrogen might seem counter-intuitive at first due to the planet's small size, but mercury is bombarded by solar wind which helps to replenish it's atmosphere.

    The Earth's atmosphere already contains free hydrogen. In fact, we're constantly losing water and hydrogen because of the splitting of water molecules in the upper atmosphere by UV light. The hydrogen produced is too light to be held by the Earth's gravitational field so it floats off into space. It's then replenished by the fission of more water molecules.

    You clearly don't realize it but a lot of lifeforms don't require oxygen or nitrogen. For example, sulfate reducing bacteria would thrive on Venus if the temperature was a bit lower. To be honest, plants might even survive there if the temperature was lower and there was less sulfur dioxide/trioxide and sulfuric acid. It could even set up a nice symbiotic relationship. The sulfate reducing bacteria would keep the sulfur compounds' concentrations to a suitable level and the plants would lower the carbon dioxide concentrations, thereby maintaining a lower temperature. In reality, the temperature is far too high but it just goes to show, planets with lots of volcanic activity like Venus could support various species of bacteria if they are located within the habitable zone around their star.

    (Original post by thisgalkate)
    And our moon is the perfect size and distance from the Earth for its gravitational pull. The moon creates important ocean tides and movement so ocean waters do not stagnate, and yet our massive oceans are restrained from spilling over across the continents.
    Yep, they're so restrained that even if we did not have excessive rainfall we'd still get flooding!

    Besides, the only reason we have continents is that loads of water is frozen at the poles. One day we'll be kissing the continents goodbye after sufficient amounts of ice have melted.

    (Original post by thisgalkate)
    Water is colorless, odorless and without taste, and yet no living thing can survive without it. Plants, animals and human beings consist mostly of water (about two-thirds of the human body is water). You'll see why the characteristics of water are uniquely suited to life.
    Actually, water is only essential to life because it's a very good solvent and it's abundant. It's capability of forming strong intermolecular attractions known as hydrogen bonds means that it's an exceptional solvent for polar molecules, and also aids the transpiration stream in plants as the water molecules end up pulling each other through the xylem. There are however many good polar solvents which can also form hydrogen bonds, ammonia for instance. If other polar solvents were more abundant we might find some organisms using these instead.

    (Original post by thisgalkate)
    The human brain processes more than a million messages a second. Your brain weighs the importance of all this data, filtering out the relatively unimportant. This screening function is what allows you to focus and operate effectively in your world. The brain functions differently than other organs. There is an intelligence to it, the ability to reason, to produce feelings, to dream and plan, to take action, and relate to other people.
    Indeed. A fine spectacle of how brilliant the process of evolution is!

    [QUOTE=Oblivion99;62862821]Yes maybe to Human knowledge natural selection was infact a proven theory, but there are many concepts which just cant be proven by so. The Human eye, the Human brain? Such flawless and complicated components of an Human body which cant be redeemed created through evolution or from matter. Tantamount to Darwin, who shared the same belief "Organs of extreme Perfection and Complication. To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree".[\QUOTE]

    Wrong. We have observed many primitive forms of these organs in organisms, which clearly display the way in which they evolved. Here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolut..._evolution.svg, this explains it nicely.

    (Original post by Oblivion99)
    The universe in itself, with its extraordinary space and recurrent fission, shouldnt there be a mechanism behind it? A mechanism such as God? You say there is no evidence, life and earth is evidence. We are in a perfect position from the sun, millitres away and we'd either burn or freeze to death? Were given all the substances to light on Earth? Its just a food for thought..
    LMAO! What the creationist forgot to mention is that by a few millimeters he actually meant about 0.37 astronomical units. That's 37% of the mean distance between the Earth and the sun! In other words, he was out by 55351000000 meters or 55351000000000 millimeters!

    Oh and fyi, it's spelled millimeter not millitre.

    Creationist logic...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Oh, for all other creationists here, please watch this before attempting to prove creationism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Eo5MdHMNcw.
    Offline

    2
    [QUOTE=Peroxidation;62875183][QUOTE=thisgalkate;62862755]The Earths size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter. Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life.[\QUOTE]

    This is utter rubbish.

    Mercury does have an atmosphere. It's very thin, but is comprised of mainly hydrogen, helium and oxygen with small amounts of water and some metals. The presence of hydrogen might seem counter-intuitive at first due to the planet's small size, but mercury is bombarded by solar wind which helps to replenish it's atmosphere.

    The Earth's atmosphere already contains free hydrogen. In fact, we're constantly losing water and hydrogen because of the splitting of water molecules in the upper atmosphere by UV light. The hydrogen produced is too light to be held by the Earth's gravitational field so it floats off into space. It's then replenished by the fission of more water molecules.

    You clearly don't realize it but a lot of lifeforms don't require oxygen or nitrogen. For example, sulfate reducing bacteria would thrive on Venus if the temperature was a bit lower. To be honest, plants might even survive there if the temperature was lower and there was less sulfur dioxide/trioxide and sulfuric acid. It could even set up a nice symbiotic relationship. The sulfate reducing bacteria would keep the sulfur compounds' concentrations to a suitable level and the plants would lower the carbon dioxide concentrations, thereby maintaining a lower temperature. In reality, the temperature is far too high but it just goes to show, planets with lots of volcanic activity like Venus could support various species of bacteria if they are located within the habitable zone around their star.



    Yep, they're so restrained that even if we did not have excessive rainfall we'd still get flooding!

    Besides, the only reason we have continents is that loads of water is frozen at the poles. One day we'll be kissing the continents goodbye after sufficient amounts of ice have melted.



    Actually, water is only essential to life because it's a very good solvent and it's abundant. It's capability of forming strong intermolecular attractions known as hydrogen bonds means that it's an exceptional solvent for polar molecules, and also aids the transpiration stream in plants as the water molecules end up pulling each other through the xylem. There are however many good polar solvents which can also form hydrogen bonds, ammonia for instance. If other polar solvents were more abundant we might find some organisms using these instead.



    Indeed. A fine spectacle of how brilliant the process of evolution is!

    (Original post by Oblivion99)
    Yes maybe to Human knowledge natural selection was infact a proven theory, but there are many concepts which just cant be proven by so. The Human eye, the Human brain? Such flawless and complicated components of an Human body which cant be redeemed created through evolution or from matter. Tantamount to Darwin, who shared the same belief "Organs of extreme Perfection and Complication. To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree".[\QUOTE]

    Wrong. We have observed many primitive forms of these organs in organisms, which clearly display the way in which they evolved. Here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolut..._evolution.svg, this explains it nicely.



    LMAO! What the creationist forgot to mention is that by a few millimeters he actually meant about 0.37 astronomical units. That's 37% of the mean distance between the Earth and the sun! In other words, he was out by 55351000000 meters or 55351000000000 millimeters!

    Oh and fyi, it's spelled millimeter not millitre.

    Creationist logic...
    Lool, idc, but I wanted to catalyse this thread :P and yes, im not a creationist :/
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by champ_mc99)
    No I think Einstein had a somewhat strong belief in some sort of superior being or force which he seems to outline is several quotes. He doesn't however believe in a personal God who accounts for morals but nonetheless he seems to believe in so sort of creator of higher intelligence. And of course he may have changed these views today but I highly doubt it due to new scientific equations, formulas and ideas BOTH going for and against the concept of God creating the universe.

    I do understand what you're saying about how a theory holds a grand. It must have a substantial amount of reliability, reasoning and evidence in order to be called a theory. Then again theories are always conflicting each other due to new ones being made every now and then. For example, the theories of light being a wave or a particle. Hence, there might yet be upcoming theories which go against the big bang. And these doubts in this theory allow us to have a choice on whether to accept it or not. I read about a couple of atheists who like to think of the universe being eternal and they have actually provided facts to back up their views.
    Again, Einstein's views are irrelevant. And there are no "new scientific equations, formulas that support the concept of God creating the universe" Not that I have heard of anyway.

    Do you doubt the Theory of Gravity? No. Then you shouldn't doubt the Big Bang Theory either. I don't care that a couple of atheists like to think that the universe is eternal. That's not what the science is showing. The Universe had a definite beginning about 13.7 billion years ago.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: March 13, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Break up or unrequited love?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.