|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
Everyday we get closer to answering the big questions: where did the Universe come from, how did life form on Earth, and what is the origin of humanity? Now, it appears that we're one step closer to answering at least one of the "Big Three": How Did Life Form On Earth.
Biochemists have been able to (and I'm summarizing here for the sake of brevity) use simple chemicals, that were present on Earth millions of years ago, to create the building blocks of RNA.
Physicists have discovered the Higgs boson (the "God particle") and are currently in the process of working to reproduce more in the LHC
My question is: once the answers have been found, once we've proven where life and the Universe came from, will you still believe in "God"?
Simple reaction makes the building blocks of a nucleic acid
Higgs Boson Discovery Has Been Confirmed
Most believers can't even think let alone are interested in facts or evidence and will continue to believe in God no matter what facts or evidence are placed directly in front of them. We see that here daily.
Cite a few example for us to evaluate, buddy. Otherwise quit making immature pun like that.
Of course I would stiil believe, that goes without saying, but I just find it interesting about what you were saying about the newest scientific study, in my view, this supports the fact that God made us from the earth. I believe, science will eventually prove there is a God:)
If a person insist on denying the truth, even when there is no other answer...well.....
So I assume you used the same scientific method that the top scientists used to draw this conclusion. Can we see your findings?
Great. Then maybe science can eventually prove who created God, and who created the creator of God, and who created...
My findings are in a book called the Bible. It has been around longer than your scientist, and he was the creator of your scientist. And one day all shall see, Hope I answered your question:)
Yes... I think your statement gives us all the answer we need about your point of view.
Really??? That's your answer? Most believers haven't even read the bible. But I'm sure you have, since you answer with such confidence.
Can I please see your findings that conclude that God created these scientists? Lest your assertions be dismissed as lacking any credibility. Since you assert that the scientific method is in agreement with your deity, you should have no problem demonstrating your conclusions.
No. You have not answered anything. But I think I have probably had enough.
Science haven't provided the ultimate answers. So, you have no ground telling them to change their minds.
Since religion is an addiction, and mental illness, there will always be a way for people, suffering from this affliction, to get the drugs they so desperately need. Facts do not concern a fearful, deluded, sick mind. This is a mental illness that has been imposed upon society, by a wretchedly deceptive authority.
Lemuel K. Washburn:
"Most men would kill the truth if truth would kill their religion."
Has science's inability to answer some questions changed the minds of any nonbelievers?
Everyone wants answers. Believers and nonbelievers are simply people too impatient to wait for them.
It shouldn't change anyone's mind until it does provide answers. And, when you say 'inability to answer some questions' I can only assume that science one day will answer those questions, however some sort of obstacle or technology required to achieve the necessary experimental results is currently not available.
Sure, I would very much like to know how gravity works and am impatient to know those answers because there's a chance that may not happen in my lifetime.
I have full faith that, given enough time, we will find the answers to all of our questions. But, I do believe that insisting we know what we don't blinds us unnecessarily.
Both of these statements are more true than will ever know. Thinking that we know without a doubt, what we "know' we know, can also be misleading.
For nothing is as it apears to be.
I think that when/if we ever find (prove) "the" answers, we will find that there is but one answer which will put to rest all of our questions.
If this answer were to be universaly accepted, It would be very detrimental for society as we know it. But not to worry, as long as science continues to search for answers to the established criteria, using the accepted methods, this secret is safe. And society will continue along the same path that it has been on for so long. Sience will continue to find answers to the questions they are asking based upon what they think they already know.
Yes, as it causes many to believe in fairy tales and invoke invisible super beings as explanations.
You classify one as of yet unproven belief as superior to another? Interesting.
I keep wondering and hoping that one day you'll actually not use your own words in an argument.
Honestly? Think about it. Everything is a belief. We can classify something as truth; but that only applies if it is universally agreed upon by what we believe to be trusted authorities. Which is still a belief.
You think humanity will get the ultimate answers one day. That's your belief, sister Emile.
Actually, I can hang there. Being open to answers trumps beliefs any day of the week. In my mind, little fella.
You seem to have your own definition of belief, in your mind
I agree totally ... with what you said.
"I think therefore I am (I think)" and if someone else also thinks that I am, it is more likely to be so, unless I don't think the other person is.
And if they aren't (?) then I probably, am not either.
Let's assume science can someday answer all the questions. Will you be able to understand the answers? Like Arthur C Clarke said, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Most of quantum physicist is already at that point (probability waves, the EPR problem multiple universes)
At what point does science become just another religion?
My findings are in a book called the Bible. It has been around longer than your scientist,
who said that my friend?....without science how would even authors of bible writer bible?....scientist are as old as humans itself...right from stone tools to present day internet , it is science all the way...
What an unscientific question. Hilarious!
A particle does not make space-time, energy or mass from nothing. And no scientist I've ever read has ever said that it would. The closest I've read of that kind of garbage was Hawking saying that gravity could've created the universe, but that's extremely lame. Gravity exists in space and time. Something has to create those continuities, first.
As far as life from chemicals, that doesn't prove anything. Personally, I agree with life being created this way, but who created the laws of physical reality?
There is only one ultimate Source, and most of us call Him (or It), "God" or "Allah."
The universe exists, therefore God IS.
Science is great at figuring out processes based upon physical continuity, but they suck at discontinuities (except perhaps in calculus).
Gravity, along with the laws of physical reality came into existence just after the Big Bang as a result of the expansion cooling the universe.
False conclusion based on massive ego.
Yes, attack what you don't understand.
Read about it here if you wish...
There is no evidence, junior. Besides, it says-
"This model resolves the "What was before the Big Bang?" question in a similar manner as the infinite regression problem. Our universe was created by an inflation event in some other universe at some arbitrary time in the infinite past. Whether or not this is satisfying is left to the reader to decide."
What an explanation! LMAO!
And who created the being who created the laws of physical reality? Since you are so logical...and you implied that nothing can come from nothing, you should have no problem conveying your findings.
So could you show us this ultimate source? Could you walk us through this step by step, so as to leave no room for delusion?
That's simply not valid. I hope you understand that this statement is pure whim, and simply unscientific and illogical...wishful thinking.
I'm glad you brought this up; could you please, and this is open to any believer out there, provide one piece of evidence for the veracity of your claims, that doesn't come from the Bible, and that isn't itself just another blind statement of faith?
Let me explain what I'm talking about for those whom I may have confused:
Science operates by generating a hypothesis, conducting experiments/observations to either prove or disprove that hypothesis, and then reporting the results for review; it's called the Scientific Method and we all learned it in 2nd grade.
Since religion is the only one claiming to have all the answers (we still call the "Big Bang" and "Evolution" theories), then the burden of proof is on you. So what I would like, is for just one of you to come up with even the tiniest shred of objective evidence.
Give me one scrap of evidence that doesn't come from the Bible, one piece of something that doesn't rely on the assumption of facts not in evidence. "Because God says so" or "because it's in the Bible", just simply don't qualify.
If you want to claim religion as a belief structure, then that's fine; I totally respect that. However, when you start asserting your beliefs to be "facts" or "truth", then you're playing with the big boys, and you need to be able to back your assertions up.
hey i have 400 holy books to back my claim and u have only tangible proofs...my books have varieties too...i have jesus as god in one , jesus as messenger in another ...
Actually I was thinking the same thing and going to post it before I saw your funny pic. These are the same scientists that a few hundred years ago would have you burned at the stake for saying the world wasn't flat.
Or better yet these scientists will claim they know how the world was formed but they still don't know how gravity works....
Remind me of a joke I read in playboy several years ago...A scientist goes up to god and tell him that they don't need him anymore. That science can create babies, matter and the world from a single handful of dirt.
God responds to this by declaring a challenge. See who can create the best world from dirt. The Scientist agrees and reached down to pickup a handful of dirt when god says...
"No get your own dirt"
Can you adequately explain quantum physics? Even if you can, did you verify all the experimental evidence yourself? If not, why are you willing to readily accept scientific papers or textbooks as fact?
Look at the global warming debate. Scientists on either side seems to have an agenda, and therefore none of the research seems unbiased. In simple terms Democrat = global warming, Republican = no global warming. Both sides present "evidence" of their case. Which side is "fact"? Which side do you have "faith" in?
God, through His son Jesus Christ, is the answer to All of your questions.
I can work out eigenvalues from a Hamiltonian, work with Schrodinger's equation, Compton effects and spin operators. Does that count?
Some yes, others not.
I don't just accept them as fact.
I have no "faith" in either side, I have an understanding.
There is compelling evidence the earth has gone through cycles of warming and cooling, such that ares of the ocean that are currently frozen over at this time were once accessible waterways for ships to pass. On the flip side, we've had ice ages, too.
by Billie Kelpin3 years ago
So, I understand that the question-answer section is to inspire hubs, BUT it feels a little disingenuous to use the information everyone provided, especially when that information would fit nicely in a list. I...
by Eric Dockett3 weeks ago
What the heck is the point of Q&A? I don't mean that sarcastically. I am really trying to figure it out. I can't formulate a strategy for properly using this feature unless I can understand the intent behind...
by boyatdelhi5 years ago
How do we go about answering the question about “who Christ really is for us today”?
by Stacy Harris5 years ago
Is anybody else irritated that when answering a question, you get told the answer is too short?I have tried answering a few questions, and while I am not just writing yes or no, I apparently don't have enough words. I...
by whonunuwho6 years ago
Can answering hubs be as meaningful as writing one?Can we serve our fellow writers as well just by answering hubs?
by John Hansen20 months ago
Why are there so many questions here concerning Christian(or belief in God) vs Atheism?Is this the best platform for discussing these issues and are people really interested in the answers, or is religion vs...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.