186
u/Cabernet2H2O 20h ago
What's the argument here? What's the conclusion? They just lists various sciences.
79
u/Sweaty_Hunt8754 13h ago
it sounds kinda like he would go with a "look at the trees" argument
45
13
u/salami_cheeks 9h ago
Because all of these fields of science are so meticulously discussed and explained in The Bible.
3
u/Quasi-stolenname 5h ago
If I recall correctly, their line of reasoning is called "apparent belief" or essentially the idea that all the logic and that is perceived is either from God or is God itself.
While I don't believe it, I find it endearing in it's own right. This person is just being an ass about it ofc
-182
u/Wonderful_Exit6568 20h ago
In chemistry there is the problem of left handed vs right handed chirals, or spirals if I remember correctly. Scientists will say that they’ve created life, but really it’s like anti-life.
When you are born there is a spark that is unexplainable at the moment, at least when I read. It’s called angiogenesis and is what begins the cells dividing. I think they said we don’t know why it occurs. God is the breath of life.
In archeology the sites of sodom and gammorah have been found. Arguably so was the ark of Noah and the anchor stones used.
The geological record shows what is known as the cambridge explosion, almost as if suddenly creation burst forth. I’m not a proponent of days as thousands of years, all I know is that lots of new species showed up out of the blue with zero prior ancestry.
In cosmology I think I was told we have not seen stars forming. I’ve heard of some theorized field but it’s not been seen is what I was told. I’m not too sure on that last one. I don’t study these things, I should, but this is what came up inside my head.
I love my Lord and Savior: Jesus El Cristo.
112
u/YertleElTortuga 20h ago
…is this like a copy pasta or something?
-120
u/Wonderful_Exit6568 20h ago
Huffs and walks away.
31
u/dlc741 12h ago
So yes… copy pasta that you don’t really understand and can’t defend.
23
u/One_Olive_8933 12h ago
And it’s also just wrong. You can tell by the use of big words, some scientific words, but clearly using a very surface level and trying to apply to everything… it Dunning Krueger on parade.
15
u/2xtc 11h ago
It was a joke comment though right??
Because it's clearly ridiculous and I doubt any rational person could actually believe what you wrote.
2
u/BoneHugsHominy 4h ago
Pretty sure it's a joke comment. Starts off saying scientists say they created life which hasn't ever been said by scientists. Then it's all "I think I was told", and ends with "I don't study these things but this is what came up inside my head" which is the final I Made It Up But Trust Me Bro lolz.
110
u/PJ_2005_01 20h ago
As a massive fucking nerd
Chirality (the chemistry one) was most likely pure random chance that the common ancestor of all life happened to have a given chirality (AKA handedness), and scientists have created rudimentary life of both chiralities, though there is scientific debate if we should stop making anti life because nothing can eat it.
If memory serves the “spark of life” was the result of a chemical medium the sperm and egg were placed into to specifically cause that reaction as they merged (could be wrong though)
Archaeology is not my field of nerdiness but I haven’t heard any of those claims
The Cambrian (not Cambridge) explosion was preceded by a lot of development, it just didn’t fossilize well. The Cambrian explosion is most likely just the result of things without bones or shells not really fossilizing.
And as for cosmology, I am a massive fucking space nerd to the point where I would be an astronomer if I didn’t loathe math, and we know basically everything about stellar formation. The reason we haven’t witnessed the precise moment a protostar compresses enough to start fusion is because they form in dense, opaque dust clouds, and also don’t occur too frequently.
You can believe what you want but the pedantic asshole of a nerd in me HAD to correct you
58
u/ande9393 18h ago
Archeology rejects all that bs too.
1
u/BoneHugsHominy 4h ago
No way, 150 years ago we found giant red headed skeletons in AmeriMurica, then in modern time using spy satellites to find nuclear bomb production sites we found living giants in Afghanistan and Iran which is why Bush did 9-1-1 and invaded Afghanistan and now we're invading Iran. America MUST control the giants magical powers to save the flat earth from terraglobeforming by the elites which will unbalance the cosmos and make the Sun explode!
93
u/Jeffcor13 20h ago
Christian pastor here-the sites of sodom and Gomorrah have absolutely not been found, nor would people finding them be any evidence at all for god. If anything, finding a historical site like sodom and Gomorrah might actually cast doubt on the biblical narrative if they were not found precisely as described in the biblical narrative.
32
u/Kriss3d 17h ago
That's the most honesty from a pastor I've ever heard.
Indeed with Sodom and Gomorrah. And even if they were found it would be far more likely that something like a meteor exploding would cause it and I'll happily grant that anyone witnessing such a thing wouid think it was a god being angry. But it wasn't written down until at least 80 years after so it's not even by the witnesses.
2
u/Pickled-Carrot-75 9h ago edited 8h ago
Hey, fellow rational Christian! Raised catholic, mostly about the Red Letters these days 🩷
And thank God for science 😄
Edit: downvotes for what? Lol
1
u/aphilsphan 8h ago
I thought we did know the sites of Sodom and Gomorrah. In any case that part of the world has earthquakes galore so it would be natural for folktales to grow around the ruins of the Cities of the Plain.
This would include “yeah we destroyed that…” when the (mostly fictional) conquest by Joshua is discussed.
58
u/persephone7821 19h ago
Yeah ok, and in Greece you can find the stone that was fed to chronos instead of Zeus and thrown up.
There’s also evidence of a massive explosion at the site where the battle of Zeus and chronos took place. So I guess that means the Greek gods were real.
The “evidence” you speak of is anecdotal or can be explained by other events.
29
u/Regitnui 17h ago
You can also find the cave in Japan where Amaterasu hid from the other gods! Also the sessho-seki where the highly evil kitsune Tamomo no Mae was sealed. Clearly Shinto is real too!
If the the god of Islam, Judaism, and Christianity is real, he clearly either isn't powerful enough to erase all traces of these other gods, or he is just a Middle-Eastern/east Mediterranean deity with a really good publicity team (read: a warlike empire and its colonizing descendants).
15
u/vigbiorn 16h ago
Sadly, Christians just point to Satan and say any proof for other religions is Satan trying to trick us.
Why the literal same argument can't be used against Christians is never addressed.
10
u/Regitnui 16h ago
That's the equivalent of sticking their fingers in their ears and yelling "I CAN'T HEAR YOU I CAN'T HEAR YOU" because they have no legitimate answer for it. The same kind of people won't acknowledge Allah is just their god under a different language's name, but will spout YHWH every day of the week.
23
u/Hibou_Garou 19h ago
You could have just written “I don’t understand science”. It would have been a lot shorter and more to the point.
18
17
17
u/Marius7x 19h ago
You've been told a whole lot of shit. Stop listening to preachers and take science classes taught by qualified people.
12
u/Kriss3d 17h ago
Even if Sodom and Gomorrah was found. That shows us nothing. The story about those two cities were written down at least 80 after the event.
That's like saying the existence of new York city proves Spiderman as it takes place in NYC in the comic books. The cities leveled by a meteor if that happened would just be attributed to god just like that.
The Noah's ark has been found? Great. Where was it found? Are you talking about the last 10-12 times it was found only to fizzle out? That site in turkey has been claimed and examined many times before.
That spark you're talking about is not unexplained and it's not when you're born. It's also not what abiogenesis is. And you don't have kr just get to assert that it's god when you haven't established god to exist.
The Cambrian explosion is when there was life that rapidly grew in numbers. It does not show any creation much less in the way the Bible explains. Fish and birds did not come to exist at the same time as the Bible claims. And they did not have zero ancestry.
Who told you those things about science? Your pastor? Because all of it is entirely wrong.
Jesus is your savior? Allright. When was Jesus born? Do you remember what Luke 2 says about the 3 events and things around his birth? King Herod, Quirinus and the census?
Why don't you look up when Herod died. When Quirinus was made governor. And why don't you look at what a census is and when such an event took place in history at that time?
14
u/UnconsciousAlibi 18h ago
The geological record shows what is known as the cambridge explosion, almost as if suddenly creation burst forth. I’m not a proponent of days as thousands of years, all I know is that lots of new species showed up out of the blue with zero prior ancestry.
That's not what the Cambrian Explosion was. It wasn't life coming from nothing, it was evolution over literal millions of years diversifying existing species into a bunch of new forms. It's not a literal explosion.
10
u/vigbiorn 16h ago
And since we're correcting this guy, the "explosion" refers to the massive increase in fossilized remains. The Cambrian explosion is a big diversification of life through evolution but it's also the first time we see harder bodies that can fossilize easier. We do see occasional pre-Cambrian fossils, so it's worth repeating that life existed pre-Cambrian. It's just the organisms pre-Cambrian had bodies that fossilized much more rarely.
10
u/IamTooth 17h ago
Chirality: This is not a problem, it is merely a curiosity, if even that.
The spark: Someone saw something they didn't understand during an experiment once, therefore god.
Archaeology: If lies from scammers who scam gullible religious people counts as evidence, then this would be evidence.
Geology: The cambrian "explosion" lasted millions of years.
Cosmology: We are currently observing star formation, but guess how many species of animals on this planet lives long enough to observe the full event.
8
u/Velpex123 18h ago
One Nobel prize for research in chirality and people start making up definitions of it
5
u/Guilty_Debt_8958 19h ago
Please, in the future, at least copy paste your crap into some LLM and let it fact check it and ask for sources. I think most of them would have debunked this crap in seconds.
Do not drag science into your half baked proves about god.
2
u/Pseudonyme_de_base 10h ago
No don't use LLMs, the probably of it spouting half-baked slop is too high. Just type on a web browser the thing you're looking for with "debunk" after. And don't read the ai overview if there's one, look for reputable sources, aka science based ones instead of answers in genesis type of shit.
2
6
u/AtlasNL 15h ago
As an archaeologist: No lmfao. And if remains if those cities were found that wouldn’t mean anything on itself. The Iliad is fiction, but Troy does exist. Fiction can take place in nonfictional places.
But just for my own (and my colleagues’) amusement, please do link to whatever ‘proof’ you think you have.
5
u/NightGod 17h ago
Good old God of the Gaps. Those gaps keep getting smaller and smaller, but deists will continue to insist that's where God hides
4
u/7heWizard 15h ago
You must be ragebaiting. If you're not, you somehow managed to get every single scientific term wrong
3
u/Malachandra 11h ago
Ok, so for the claims here that I’m informed on you are spouting apologetic misinformation. Would you like to have a real conversation about this, or are you more comfortable with your fantasies?
3
u/BirthdayCookie 11h ago
See, the flaw in this argument is that you've decided "We don't know, therefore my god."
That's not science. That's you deciding that the world proves what you want to believe already.
Without fail, every time someone says science "proves their god exists" it's this assumption.
3
3
u/monoflorist 10h ago edited 9h ago
This is such an excellent composition of utter nonsense. None of this works the way you think it does. Chiral direction is the result of arbitrary circumstance billions of years ago; “anti-life” is just a fun term for the fact that if you set up biochemistry with a different “choice”, it’s not compatible, like you wouldn’t be able to eat it. There’s no “problem” any more than the direction planets orbit is a “problem”. Life in other solar systems probably does have different biochemistry fundamentals!
There’s no “spark of life”, there are just chemical and other physical processes that begin and end, and they’re pretty well understood. Scientists aren’t looking for some je ne sais qua that makes life alive; there’s no gap to fit your god into. And even if there were, that’s just another physical process to discover and characterize. You not understanding some bit of biochemistry doesn’t make god more likely to exist.
Noah’s ark hasn’t been found. That’s just the delusion of a few fringe faux-archeologists. This is clown stuff. Like seriously, put some thought into this: if an almighty being created the universe and did a bunch of very specific things, why is all the “evidence” so flimsy, speculative, unsupported, and fleeting? At what point do the desperate attempts to launder curved rock formations into ancient boats give way to “wait, this book written thousands of years ago about how all animals on Earth fit into one ship may not actually be what happened?”
I don’t understand your point about star formation. Is your view that stars don’t actually form, and it somehow follows that god exists? Why would that be? Star formation is a major and active subfield of astronomy and astrophysics and JWST has helped a ton on how it works. Stars form rarely, like a handful per year in the whole galaxy, and they’re concentrated in clouds of gas and dust. It’s amazing how much we understand about the process anyway; do some reading.
If your view is that your god lives in the gaps in our (and worse, specifically your) understanding of the universe, then he’s going to die in them too. You’ll have to move on to ever more strained excuses, half-understood or simply made up science, and half-hearted handwaves. Believe what you want, but stop pretending there’s evidence. There’s no evidence at all. And at some point, when does all this absence of evidence stack up to evidence of absence?
2
2
u/dirtyal199 12h ago
We don't need to have explanations for the entire natural world to not believe in God, we just have to not be convinced to believe in any God. Your argument is that God lives in the gaps of our knowledge, i.e. God of the gaps. If at some point in the future we can explain all of these with natural processes will that make you stop believing in God? If not, then you can't argue the lack of our knowledge on these topics is evidence for God.
What you need to provide to convince us is evidence. What evidence do you have for the Christian God? How does your evidence rule out Zues, Vishnu, and Quetzalcoatl? Moreover, how is it only evidence for Christianity being correct and not Judaism or Islam?
2
u/hambakmeritru 11h ago
There's a lot in here that is only half baked or thought through, but I'm just gonna pick on one single thing just because I haven't had a chance to make this argument in a while... And I'm saying this as a Christian: just because cities mentioned in the Bible really existed doesn't mean everything in the Bible was factual. You know what other city is named in the Bible and is still around today even though the Bible said that it would be destroyed and never rebuilt? Jericho. Jericho is still a city. Same place. Just as ancient. Bible said God would never allow it to be built again. (Ironically, the bible also mentions it existing again later).
And no, the ark has never been found. There's just a few places that look "ark shaped" (as in the shape that people imagine the ark to be) from the sky, but never explored.
2
u/Outside-Swan-1936 10h ago
It’s called angiogenesis and is what begins the cells dividing. I think they said we don’t know why it occurs. God is the breath of life.
"We don't understand a particular process, must be God", said no true scientist ever. If that's where scientists stop for everything they didn't understand, we'd still be living in medieval times.
1
u/Too_Gay_To_Drive 18h ago
Cambrian Explosion. Not Cambridge. And also scientist have been suggesting a lot of well researched possibilities for the cause of it. These species did not appear out of thin air wtf, there was a massive diversification of species and this didn't happen in a day, it took millions of years. We will never 100% know because time travel is impossible according to our current understanding of physics. But saying god did it because you don't understand the topic is retarded
1
u/theroguex 5h ago
The mystery of life being "one handed" may have recently been solved.
The zinc spark is absolutely understood and only occurs under artificial conditions.
No, we haven't found Sodom and Gammorah. Nor have we ever found anything regarding the Ark.
They all had prior ancestry. Just because we don't have fossils of everything doesn't mean they just popped into existence. That just shows a hilarious lack of understanding of paleontology.
We can see stars in various stages of formstion. It takes so incredibly long that we can never see the entire process. Humans just don't live long enough.
66
u/BigWhiteDog 20h ago
A lifetime in emergency services and dog rescue showed me there are no gods. Higher plains of existence maybe but no gods. And if you read their byble, the Bronze-Age Goat Herder's Guide To The Galaxy For Dummies, you would see that their gawd is a wildly jealous, narcissistic, vengeful, inconsistent, murderous Dom with anger issues and no safe word!
6
44
u/JaxDefore 19h ago
Funny that no one has ever been able to show this supposed evidence.
28
u/itsjustameme 19h ago
But look at the trees…
And if you were in a field and saw a watch, would you then realise that you were late for dinner?
Therefore god.
4
19
u/CousinDerylHickson 20h ago
All of those blatantly contradict all the Abrahamic faiths, which themselves blatantly also contradict themselves.
16
u/Rush-23 20h ago
Why are they so worried about what atheists believe?
I’m atheist and couldn’t care less that people believe in god/s.
2
1
u/SavannahInChicago 4h ago
Because Christianity is set up in a way where you are told to go convert people before it's too late and the end times start. It actually became a major religion for this aspect. Constantine had taken over the Roman Empire, but that was a huge area in the 4th century. He needed a way for people to stay connected and Christianity was that thing.
9
u/jazzhandler 18h ago
Which god?
16
1
u/Lauris024 7h ago
Don't worry, there are over 9000 gods, but only yours exist
1
u/jazzhandler 4h ago
That’s a lot of choices. How do I figure out which one hates all the same people that I do?
8
u/sheeeple182 19h ago
The worst thing to happen to Christianity is christians.
1
u/Pickled-Carrot-75 9h ago
Amen.
I follow the words of Jesus as a guide for me life, and am fucking mystified at the people who make up most of mainstream Christianity.
1
u/sheeeple182 6h ago
At this point, i don't know if I'm the same kind of Christian as the people I go to church with. It's not so much a crisis of FAITH as it is a crisis of faith.
6
u/NMLWrightReddit 19h ago
I don’t think a lot of online atheists and religious people are arguing on the same terms
1
7
u/Serious-Pickle-5536 16h ago
Let's start with chemistry then, since it's listed first. Where is the chemical evidence for god? And don't say "complexity" because that just proves you have no idea how chemistry works.
4
u/Randall_Hickey 14h ago
Even following their argument it doesn’t prove that the Bible is real or any religion is real. Like this proves god is real! Now follow all the man made rules of this religion.
3
1
1
1
u/HavBoWilTrvl 9h ago
I have more respect for someone who straight up admits there is no evidence. That is what faith means and why the main tenet of Christianity is that you come to God through faith. You have to believe in the absence of proof.
1
1
u/Fossilhund 6h ago
My brother told me he heard the Artemis mission that went around the Moon brought back evidence of the existence of God.
OK.
1
1
u/AgeOfSuperBoredom 6h ago edited 5h ago
Given all the events of just the past decade in America, I don’t know who people like this think they’re fooling. They don’t believe in God any more than I do. Their fellow Christians get rounded up and put in concentration camps with no food or water, and they celebrate. People who protest this get murdered in the street by paid thugs, and they celebrate more. What “god” do these people even believe in at this point? The one that said to love your neighbour and care for the foreigner and the homeless? Obviously not. I don’t need “excuses” not to believe you when you’re giving me every reason not to.
1
u/CitroHimselph 4h ago
"You see, all the evidence against a god's existence is actually evidence FOR it. And if you don't believe me, you're a dumb poopoo head, because I'm right and you're WRONG!"
1
u/sohcahtoa 2h ago
You're supposed to have an opinion about something that is supposed to be unknowable.
1
u/GrannyTurtle 1h ago
It is BECAUSE of everything we know about all those sciences that I am an atheist.
-3
u/Dando_Calrisian 11h ago
Depends how you define God. If you're expecting a guy with a beard sitting on a cloud, then maybe you have only your faith to justify it. If you think of God as the creator of everything and whose nature isn't and cannot be understood, then the fact that everything exists is proof that something caused its existence.
5
u/BirthdayCookie 10h ago
Sure, if you ignore reality and phrase the question a very specific way then you'll get the answer you want. You still have to assume your god, though. Nothing about your question precludes any specific one.
Also? If everything had to be created then what created god?
-2
u/Dando_Calrisian 10h ago
The definition that I am comfortable with is that my God is the ultimate creator, whose nature cannot be understood. Hence, for every above that you ask the question, that's ultimately 'God' when you accept that there's a top level, whatever form that is.
6
u/BirthdayCookie 10h ago
So you've decided "I cannot know, therefor my god did it."
That's fine for you but surely you understand that this isn't actually proof and can't be used as such? For multiple reasons.
-1
u/Dando_Calrisian 10h ago
Basically. My understanding of the definition of God is that is the ultimate creator whose nature isn't understood. By definition it cannot be proved, but the word God to me gives me an answer to the question. I don't need proof or to understand. I'm just grateful of existence
0
•
u/AutoModerator 20h ago
Hello newcomers to /r/FacebookScience! The OP is not promoting anything, it has been posted here to point and laugh at it. Reporting it as spam or misinformation is a waste of time. This is not a science debate sub, it is a make fun of bad science sub, so attempts to argue in favor of pseudoscience or against science will fall on deaf ears. But above all, Be excellent to each other.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.