Life has no logical purpose

Why even come into this forum if you're not going to read a response to your statement? Honestly, I don't fill my responses with useless garbage, it's information directed at you.

I said you can't use the bible to prove the bible nor articles that are only proven true by the bible. I explained why with my Dr.Seuss analogy, honestly read the damn response.
I'm not limiting your evidence I'm saying give me some real evidence. The bible isn't evidence if the only thing you can use to support it is itself lol. Use common sense.

I see things for what they are instead of believing an invisible man in the sky controls everything? I can see science as something that can be tested and repeated if I ever need verification while any "acts of god" can't ever be repeated.

Like I said, religion is a veil to knowledge. Break it down and everything that is and shall be will be known because you are now looking at it from the correct perspective, the actual, not the fictional.

 

In all honesty if you said that to me in person I would probably knock the shit out of you.

Don't feel powerful sitting behind your computer screen, throwing shallow insults at me. The fact that you 'lol' (laugh out loud) at things like this is extremely sad.

I don't think you are understanding the original point I was trying to make. I do not believe it is up to humans to prove how the world was created and how the world will end.

Please show me some evidence that you claim to have. I've yet to see you post any. I personally don't claim to have any evidence because I don't think it is our place to figure these types of questions out.

 

hmm, does the purpose of something NEED to lay in the absolute final?
using an analogy
this would make the purpose of turning on a computer to turn it off, which it clearly isn't.

as for virus',
penicillin will be useless within the next 10 years. virus's are gaining resistances to many other drugs we have to counteract them. they adapt much faster than it is possible for us to.
I would not count them out simply because they do not have a cerebral cortex because i do not feel our cortex is incredibly special, in its current form. even though we have higher reasoning powers, we hardly use them. you could say we inherently act like virus' even with this powerful cortex.

 

So is the fact that so many adults still believe in imaginary friends and when they try to defend them they do a horrible job.

We're not proving, we're finding out. We already know how the world was formed, well the best idea...and it makes more sense then it appearing out of nowhere. Scientific version keeps with the law of conservation of matter as well.

Or you don't have any evidence haha. Religion has almost nothing to back it up and anything it does is easily refutable.

My evidence is tests and theories that are proven through trial and error to be true and will always give you the same result.

Religion is just...believe this or else bad things will happen. "Why should I believe that book?" Because if you don't then you will go to hell. It's laughable.

You also failed to answer my Hindu analogy. If I have nothing to gain as an atheist, so I should be christian "just in case" Why aren't you Hindu, "just in case"?

 

thank you for distinguishing yourself as a person who backs up their fallacious beliefs with his fists.

why not?
we have the technology to determine many facts about the universe. why not use it?
or are you arguing for willful ignorance?

there is lots of evidence showing how old the universe is, that it spread from a single point ect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background_radiation

 

If something does have an absolute final then yes I believe the purpose does lie here.
The problem with the analogy is you're picking out a specific object when (relating this to life that would be like picking out 1 individual) it's obvious one specific object will have many different purposes because with one person their purposes are chosen by themselves. However when you're trying to decide the collective purpose, you would need to look at the computer as matter and energy, and since (as far as physics go) there is no definite end to matter and energy, they really don't have a purpose except when you combine them with other infinite planes as stated before

Oh I agree, we do act like them and thats probably due to the primal areas of our brains, but we also have the ability to analyze this behavior and understand it which is a step in the right direction.
I think for now we are the higher beings, but at any moment that can change, don't get me wrong I'm not insinuating that we'll always be on top.

 

hmmm, i will counter by arguing that life and death are not infinite planes, they are simply matter being converted. the belief in life is perhaps the biggest illusion.
this is a somewhat depressing deterministic view, but i do believe that we are just bundles of mass and this consciousness i have at the moment is only a consequence of a complex form of mass.

simply put, i do think your model of the universe has something to it, i do not believe it can be applied to life and death.

 

Won't answer any of your statements until you show me the proof you claim to have.

Back up my beliefs with my fist? No, if someone insulted me like that dumbass did I would use my fists. It is not to back up my beliefs, you should really learn how to comprehend what you read.

 

But Life-Existence-Death are not infinite planes, they're idealistic entities. I said we use the infinite planes for an infinite entity respectfully.

 

What are you asking me proof for? I've said alot.

 

then why do idealistic entities need to have a purpose?

like i said, i don't think your matter-space-time model applies

 

lol, he didnt insult you
he made a counter argument
learn the difference

also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background_radiation

 

THIS ^ And thanks.

iDung - you've done nothing but try to cram your distorted opinion down our throats this entire time. That itself is an insult to anyone who does not share your same belief, which happens to be like 80% of Sythe (something like 45% atheist, plus many Sythers are Muslim). So you think that by insulting 80% (give or take) of Sythe you've done nothing wrong? I highly doubt you'd do anything if I said that to you IRL, even though I have no idea why you would in the first place. Do you always get offensive and assault people when someone disagrees with you? You're actually proving my point that religion actually tends to be immoral in the sense that you would hit me just for disagreeing with you.

I also love how you completely ignored my long ass post from earlier that pretty much shows you you're an ignorant son of a bitch. BY THE WAY, the burden of proof lies on religion, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. Despite having tons and tons of counter-evidence, you can not show us one single scrap of evidence confirming the validity of any religion.

Because I know you're going to flip this around on me:
The burden of proof lies on religion because it is religion that is asserting that there is a God, not science. For example, if I were to say there was a teacup orbiting one of Saturn's moons, I would probably be asked to present you with evidence of the teacup. Science has a static viewpoint without God.. it does not exclusively DENY God's existence. Therefore, you must present us with evidence.. not the other way around.

 

They don't but they do. If you see it that way it is. I feel this is where ideal part comes into play about whether you want to accept they do or not.

It applies, however you have to fix it into a non-infinite plane. Life-Existence-Death are specific entities and finite.
Although I will look into fine tuning my explanation =]

 

3. Under current logic, something cannot be created out of nothing.

Under this logic, nothing can exist because billions of years ago there was nothing.

 

life and death and even existence are not finite nor specific entities.
we label things as being alive and therefore create life. life does not exist on it's own, it is but an idea. all life is is matter changing form.
just as life, death is not finite.
ex. we used to see the earth as just matter. now we are trying to prevent the "death" of our planet because of hte whole global warming scare.
a more clear example, when is a fetus alive? when the two cells meet to form a zygote? what about the sperm, are they not alive on their own?

see hwat i mean, life exists only as far as we as humans attribute it.

 

No, everything was condensed into a singularity, all the matter in the universe.
But the question I find intriguing is if all the matter was stable at one point (thus being able to form the singularity) what was introduced to it to make it unstable?

 

Exactly, you've 'said a lot'. Now show some actual proof behind what your saying. You are being a hypocrite.

@Everyone that keeps writing essay long posts
I do not have a problem replying to arguments if they don't take 10 minutes to read. I simply don't care about this topic as much as you do so I will not be wasting anymore time than needed.

Btw if you really don't think the kid that posted the little picture insulted me you have some problems that are to large for me to help you with.

 

maybe it was inherently unstable
matter was not condensed to a single particle of almost infinite density for an incredibly long time, as the big bang follow the big crunch. this is what i think anyways


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Crunch

 

for the third time,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_...ound_radiation


also

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_redshift