Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.
Debra AI Prediction
Post Argument Now Debate Details +
Arguments
WOW! An article where some guy claims, in contrast to the overwhelming majority of scholars, that Jesus was made up to enslave Africans with no evidence to back this claim. EVERYONE READING PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE to see how little evidence it presents to make its case. Are you going to make arguments, or direct me to articles where some they talk about some guy who told them what he though without going into much detail why? If There is no God address these actual facts regarding the matter.
I came up with this argument myself, its not an article, so address it yourself, with facts and logic. Are you going to back up your words or not?
  Considerate: 76%  
  Substantial: 67%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 93%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.6  
  Sources: 5  
  Relevant (Beta): 76%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 84%  
  Substantial: 98%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.48  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 90%  
  Learn More About Debra
I don't remember tagging you when I posted that article almost like it wasn't directed to you. But hey if the shoe fits wear it. I guess you are back to smack talk now. (that didn't take long) When you present facts I'll address them. Thus far all you've done is present opinions, and a logical scenario that defeats itself. So when you come up with an argument you let me know, and I'll address it myself with facts and logic. No I'm not going back on my words, but ... and this may hurt your feelings... I'm not a monogamous debater. I talk to other people. Boy you must have gotten really excited when you thought you "got me". ROFL Like F***** christmas at the tide house or some such s***.
  Considerate: 30%  
  Substantial: 98%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 98%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.82  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 83%  
  Learn More About Debra
Ah, I just love you @RollTide420 so far you are the ONLY person to have come this far with me on this, and you are even pointing out legitimate fallacies, just wonderful, I thank God.
You are absolutely right, science by definition cannot cover God/Infinite, because as you said, science is observing the world around us, finite created things, and because God is Infinite/Spirit, He cannot be observed. Now here is where I stopped also, years ago, .. but, I was still able to observe God.
I could see and understand Infinite, and since Infinite is invisible as God is, how is it that I not only understand, but I tell you, I see God, but not in a physical sense,. Now how could I explain this?
John 1:18 No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son,[f] who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.
How can Jesus declare that which he cannot see?
I read a little about this philosopher Tillich, he said: "God is not a being, but the ground of being" what else can be the "ground of Being" other than Infinite, which is God?
Then I got into reading about the "Blue Brain project" and what they were doing? I then realized that just as they are hiding the Flat Earth from us, they are also hiding God/Infinite from us.
Go and Google something about Infinite, and you will be shocked, well I was: I asked "Does Infinite exist scientifically?"
The answer?
'0', as if Infinite didn't exist.
Google asked me - "Did you mean: Does infinity exist scientifically?"
Well no Google, I meant "does Infinite" exist scientifically?" And to my shock, Google did not have any info on Infinite, only "infinity", so I figured, OK Google, so tell me if infinity exists or not?
https://plus.maths.org/content/science-fiction-science-fact-does-infinity-exist
- Does infinity exist? In the latest online poll of our Science fiction, science fact project you told us that you'd like an answer to this question. So we went to speak to cosmologist John D. Barrow to find out more. We also bring you a range of other Plus articles on the subject of infinity, as well as an article from FQXi who are our partners on this project. Happy reading!
Wait a minute, where did they go to seek answers to Infinity? To a "cosmologist"? Where the vacuum of space is full of imaginary planets and alien worlds, where science meets science fiction, and where science is "Left Behind", and science fiction takes over?
Yes, cosmology is science-fiction (even the article mentions it) and they took over science, they tell us what is real, and what is not, and if it comes to God, it is claimed as non-existent.
Our body is not just a machine that does work and reproduce, it is also the most delicate scientific sensing instrument in earths creation. Hearing, smell, touch, taste and most importantly seeing with the eyes.
Now what do these senses do? They send digital messages through the nervous system to the brain, which then sends all this up to, ... to where?
To the brain? If its already in the brain, what is it that we see with fMRI above the brain? Why would the brain send all this up above itself, if the brain is the final stop?
I tell you where it sends it, and to whom, the brain sends the information to, through the brain, up to us, the spirit/mind, which, or more properly, "who" reads all this information and acts upon it. Or doesn't act, we the mind decide what to do with the information.
No one, that is no scientific experiment has ever detected the mind, I read a long time ago in a science magazine that "dreams seem to come out of nowhere?" of course it seems to come out of nowhere, because you cannot see the mind/spirit of man. But of course they would never admit that it is from the mind/spirit of man, .. but I'm telling you, they KNOW it is there, just like they knew the earth is flat, that there is a dome above us and they cant go beyond it. They know Devils Tower is what's left over of a giant tree. They know that mountain climbers have found Noah's Ark, the know all this, and I know they know from the clues they leave behind.
So how do I know that they know? Look:
Like I said above, if the brain is it, that all the sensors (eyes, ears, tongue, nose etc.) send information "into" the brain, why would the brain send all this info out, and it IS sending it out because as you see with fMRI they can see it and even read it! Actually all they are doing is figuring out what commend we send goes where! With all that monitors on his head, they ask the guy to lift his arm, and watch where that information is being sent, that's it
This would make no sense if all the info just went to the brain, and the brain is what figures out what to do with it, we would not see it spill out like that.
Not only that, but the opposite is true too, that they can see thoughts, like Michio Kaku said, that they can see the info going into the brain, and they read this, and knowing which part of the brain then what body part that signal actually goes to, and record this info, which later they can send it to a computer, or even control the computer, or a wheelchair.
This information is not coming from the brain, but from the mind into the brain, and the brain sends the signals to the parts of the body it was intended to send it to.
I'm sure you've seen how hey can even touch tat part of the brain with an electrode, and make your hand raise up. This is another proof that our mind is above the brain, creating, then sending electrical signals to the desired places in the brain, which then shoots it to the rest of the body part through the nervous system that the mind wants to move.
It's from here, knowing there is a spirit/mind outside the brain, in the body that is not detectable until it sends the info to the brain, or receives the info from the brain, is when we can start to understand God.
Have you seen the movie CHAPPiE?
@Rooltide420 Also, in regard to your point about infinity, I understand the difference between "infinite" and "going into infinity", but I don't see the difference in infinite and infinity themselves except one is an adjective and the other is a noun.
Look, like "flying in the air", and "air"
"Going into to infinity" and "Infinite"
This is critical to understanding Infinite/God:
"Just as all things are IN God, all things are in Infinite.
RollTide420 - Also, I wouldn't say infinite and God are the same in meaning, although I will agree that God is the only being which is infinite, or in other words he is the only being which possesses that quality.
Oh Lord, you're almost there, we've moved enough dirt through science out of the way where you can see the tip of a very large "spiritual iceberg" You are now leaving the physical and beginning to see the spiritual, for God is Spirit, only those in the spirit can see God.!
existence:
Only finite can exist, that is; whatever exists is finite, and it was created.
God/Infinite
God/Infinite is NOT "existence", nor a "being", God/Infinite is the Ground of Being, the ground of existence.
Remember, don't conflate infinity with Infinite, this is why they hid "Infinite" from us, as if it doesn't even exist, right? Look it up yourself. They are Hiding God from us.
Remember Moses asking "Who God was?"
God said "I AM Who I Am, .. tell them "I Am" has sent me to you!"
Let's not put God with the gods. Remember no one seen God!
So who was Moses talking to then? He said: "I have seen God and lived", that standing there in the presence of God, he trembled, fell on his face.
Here is the next step which you must understand: Moses was talking to an Angel. A Fiery Angel. Why? Didn't he say I have seen God with his own eyes? That he was in the presence of God?
God is Spirit, He takes on any created form He chooses, and speaks through whomever, or whatever He chooses, the whispering wind, a yell of thunder, Angels, and even once He made a form of a man, and wrestled with Jacob with it, remember?
God can take any form He chooses, but He put a bit of Himself in one form, made from the dust of the earth. It is His Breath/Spirit that He put into that dust, (more like a masterpiece than a pile of duts) and this is what makes us individuals, all children of God.
1 Corinthians 3:16 Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?
So just as Infinite God needs to take something finite to communicate through with us finite, the spirit in us God put in a body which we ourselves speak through, do things with, its just a temple, a vehicle, but it forms Gods Spirit to a complete individual, which can choose to even disobey God, just as the verse above warns us not to.
OK, see where we at so far?
God bless us all.
  Considerate: 83%  
  Substantial: 79%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 91%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.64  
  Sources: 7  
  Relevant (Beta): 16%  
  Learn More About Debra
Actually science period depends on the universal causation. This isn't the first time I've had to tell an atheist about their religion. Pull up a chair. Science is based on the scientific method. The scientific method is a means of determining the relationship between an independent variable and a dependent variable. This relationship is a causal one. The independent variable causes the dependent variable. All science is based on determining causal relationships so if universal causation isn't true, then the scientific method is bogus.
Could you please direct me to a link or video where this is shown in a lab setting?
How is this not a paradox? And this explains shy God doesn't need a cause, as it claims he exists outside of the universe, with the paradox showing that something must exist outside of the observable universe and is therefore not bound by causality. Going back forever in time would require an infinite chain of causes going back, and since time can't go back forever, fore the reasons explained, we have a paradox if nothing exists beyond our observable universe.
I pretty much said time has a beginning, or goes back forever, meaning causality would go back forever. If this is a false dichotomy, what other options are there within the bounds of causality, which if done away with renders the scientific method, the basis for your beliefs, bogus.
So because time isn't "causing" the problem its not the effect? You realize cause an effect are two different things, not the same right? Your relgion claims that there is a relationship between time and gravity, which is where the phenomenon of time dilation comes in . Whether time is the cause or effect may be unclear, but something is effecting it as time slows and speeds up depending on gravity.
Actually magnetism and electricity's properties may be expressed negatively, but no substance found in them has a negative amount. The number of protons is positive, the number of electrons is positive, and the number of any kind of quark is positive. The negative only comes into play when you compare the numbers of opposing charges. Electrons are said to have "negative"charge, but its not a negative number of anything physical. Elctrons have positive mass, even if it is extremely small compared to protons, it isn't negative. If there is more of electrons than protonsthe charge is expressed as negative, but no particle in there can there be said to be a negative number of.
Time is physical. I took physics in high school and time was in several equations, most notably, s=d/t. Physics is physical, time is physical. Also,I didn't mention any rules time follows, is imply said it could be observed and measured and is used in physics equations. However, with that begin said, please point me to an example where a physics equations that's been proven true came out wrong because time didn't behave the way it was supposed to?
Also, what is the significance of light moving forward in time? Doesn't everything move forward in time?
Actually you don't understand the concept of infinity. Infinity is a positive number(albeit an imaginary number). It has no end, but it a has a beginning, at 0. If you multiply infinity by negative one you get negative infinity. Negative infinity has no beginning, but has an end at zero. negative infinity and infinity are two different number, just as 2 and negative 2 are different numbers. If you are solving a mathematical equation and the answer is negative infinity, but you just put infinity, you will get the equation wrong. There can't be anything physical there is a truly negative amount of (charges are assigned positive and negative arbitrarily by us, there is nothing inherently negative about negative charges, the simply oppose what we have named positive charges), so negative infinity cannot truly exist. If I' can't use math to prove science, than physicists really need to reconsider using so much math in their formulas.
Your example of a car contains no exponents, which are a part of our reality. Add those to the equation and you will notice the significance of zero. You can't say zero isn't a significant unique number just because it little (not no effect, but little) on one particular measurement.
A non-linear viewpoint of time hasn't been proven, nor is there any sort of consensus of this amongst scientists. To say non-linear is non-subjective, misleading, as non-subjective implies that your unproven viewpoint has been proven, which it hasn't.
No, because the principle of universal causation has only been demonstrated inside our universe. Outside, it need not apply. The principle of universal causation itself is what creates a paradox, and since the scientific method rests on it, something must exist beyond what can be proven through the scientific method.
The following definition of science was copied and pasted from dictionary.com- "systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation." I feel I've conformed to this quite well with my definition. The only proof atheists will accept are scientific and God can't be proven through the scientific method, as he exists beyond the observable universe, and this is the realm science covers. However, the paradoxes of causality I presented show that there is more to our existence than what can be proven through the scientific method.
Zero facts? Either you don't know what facts are or you didn't bother to count. I'm not going to list all of them, but here are a few indisputable facts I presented.
  Considerate: 88%  
  Substantial: 90%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.24  
  Sources: 20  
  Relevant (Beta): 17%  
  Learn More About Debra
I apologize for this misunderstanding, I should have paid closer attention. However, the fact remains that the article gave no evidence o back up its point, and only stated some guys opinion. In fact it was only like 3 paragraphs. This versus a mountain of evidence to the contrary, such as the fact that we have physical copies of manuscripts of the Gospels dating to the 2nd century, more than one thousand years before any European run African-based (the romans might have taken Africans as slaves, but their slavery wasn't based on African labor, it was multi-racial) slave-trade took place on any sort of large scale.
Also, I don't recall saying anything about you talking smack. I said to avoid the ridiculous ad hominem fallacies and not to make assumptions about what a person you've never met would do in a situation they've never faced, as you do not have adequate information to have any clue what you are talking about here. That wasn't even a good educated guess, as statistics regarding people's willingness to engage in heroism don't really back you up. Talk all the S*** you would like, but for the sake of not wasting my time, please refrain from using fallacies or assumptions based on a situation you are ignorant of. If you can talk s*** without committing fallacies, I'm all game.
  Considerate: 63%  
  Substantial: 98%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.16  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 97%  
  Learn More About Debra
I also agree that the mind/body problem is great evidence for God. however, like God, the mind exists outside the realm defined by science. Yet we know it is real which is more proof that there is more to existence than what science can prove.
When God takes physical forms such as he did with Moses in the burning bush, or at the coming of Christ, he is still God, but he is not in his original form, which is invisible. While God in his original form is outside of science, he left a decent trail of evidence for him that we can trace.
We can't see God is his original form physically, but we can see him with our "spirit eyes," if you will. However, spiritual sight, as real as it is, is outside of the bounds defined by the study of science (which I emphasize is not all-encompassing). Some of the best evidence for God come from the social sciences (which are considered distinct from "hard sciences," or "natural sciences" in that social sciences are based on trends and not proven experiments). DNA functions very much like a language, as well as many other features of a universe which strongly point to a creator. But linking the linguistic nature of DNA to a creator is a philosophical argument, not a scientific one. The fallacy of scientism is that they believe science to be all encompassing.
With that being said, I still don't see a fundamental difference between infinite and infinity. Yes God is infinite, but when you say this, what you are saying is that all of his qualities "go into infinity." For the rest of us, if he allows some of our qualities to go into infinity, but not all, then those qualities are infinite, but not us, as some of our other qualities are limited, and therefore we are not completely infinite. God, however, has no finite qualities. All of his qualities extend into infinity, which is why is the only being which can be said to be infinite. However, the quality of his being infinite is because all of his qualities "go into infinity" and therefore the point remains that infinite and infinity are merely different conjugations of the same root word.
  Considerate: 95%  
  Substantial: 99%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.7  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 91%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 79%  
  Substantial: 98%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 93%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.38  
  Sources: 2  
  Relevant (Beta): 95%  
  Learn More About Debra
The article wasn't a "proof", stay focused.
And you don't think ad hominem attacks/fallacies are talking smack?
  Considerate: 62%  
  Substantial: 39%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 78%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.54  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
Well, since you've brought this up, could you please present the proof. As I've stated the earliest manuscripts of the Gospels date to over a millennium before the African slave trade took place.
Ad hominem and fallacy is talking smack but it is not the only form of talking smack. Just like all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares, likewise, all ad hominem and fallacy may be talking smack, but not all talking smack is ad hominem or fallacy. If you wanna talk smack or make mocking comments I don't care, but don't assert things that you would have no way of even obtaining at sort of information as to whether or not your assertion is true. Please explain to me where you got your information regarding what situations I have and haven't been in and how I reacted. If you can't do this, then do not make assertions about what situations I have and haven't been in and how I reacted as this is based off of pure speculation which again amounts to bulls***.
  Considerate: 64%  
  Substantial: 99%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.4  
  Sources: 1  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 61%  
  Substantial: 97%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 91%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
RollTide420 said:
I also agree that the mind/body problem is great evidence for God. however, like God, the mind exists outside the realm defined by science. Yet we know it is real which is more proof that there is more to existence than what science can prove.
@Coveny @Erfisflat @RollTide420
Actually, it is the opposite, this is what I mean by pseudoscience having kidnapped science and definitions, especially anything about, or regarding God.
Infinite, as in the invisible, "Infinite, Eternal conscious, intelligent Spirit/Mind" is what's real, the rest is made up, .. they are finite created "things" rules and laws, Gods laws. Like this:
I know you have never heard any Christian theologian use such comparison, yet if you think about it, you will find that what I say here is true!
Take our video games for instance, what is "real" in the video game? It's all created by a language, .. laws right? The 'only' thing real in a video game is when a human takes control of a character through a controller, that's it. And what the mind does with the character is limited by what the character was programmed to do. For instance if a character was programmed for walking/running on the ground, that's all you'll be able to do with it. But another may have been programmed with the ability to fly, and now that one can do that too.
Well the same how God created human body for instance; the 'only' thing real, or uncreated about a human body is his mind/spirit, the rest is just a very, very complex set of rules, created by a very complex language that God calls "Word".
So just as in a computer game a human mind gives life to the character (except for the AI characters that are preprogrammed to mimic intelligence), the mind is what gives life to this here physical 'body'.
Now what is in the realm of science?
What is "science"? Observing the world around us, correct? Well we use things like microscopes, but we forget that the eye is also just another sensing tool, we just use a microscope to enhance what we see with the eyes. Like I said, this body is just a tool used by us the mind to create with, and to sense, to enjoy creation with.
What we observe through science with tools starting with our body is all digitized and turned into electronic information which is sent to the brain, which sifts through and distributes all the information into electronic signals that we the 'mind' read.
So you see that "we the mind/spirit" is not outside the realm defined by science, it is what, actually "who" observes science!
In other words, it is "we/spirit/mind" who are scientists, not the tools we use, like a microscope, our eyes, ears nose etc. The evidence of the mind is the activity, them neurons firing off above our brain. So we have proof of both, the physical and the spiritual.
So just as a microscope is not the scientist, neither is our eyes or any other created sensing tool that is in our body, and this includes our brain. We the mind are scientists and creators. How can we say that we scientists are out of the realm defined by science, .. right?
RollTide420 said - When God takes physical forms such as he did with Moses in the burning bush, or at the coming of Christ, he is still God, but he is not in his original form, which is invisible. While God in his original form is outside of science, he left a decent trail of evidence for him that we can trace.
Exactly, because Infinite/Mind/God is Spirit, has no form just as our mind doesn't, right!? You cannot see my mind and I cannot see yours, but it is not outside the realm of science.
Like you said, God takes whatever form He choses, but us, God put us in one form, each man has his own form/body that we are stuck using. It is what gives us our different characters, and since we have free will, we can go as far as disobey God, even forget that He exists!
About Christ. Here is where we have to be careful in not associating a specific body to God, like you did here with Christ/Jesus, who we know is really the Word (John 1).
Why?
Because then God would be Jesus. Or another religious group could worship the "Fiery Angel" Moses spoke to, as God, you know what I mean? We have to remember that; "God is Spirit", and when He possesses a body and makes Himself known, the body isn't God. Moses understood this.
RollTide420 - We can't see God is his original form physically, but we can see him with our "spirit eyes," if you will. However, spiritual sight, as real as it is, is outside of the bounds defined by the study of science (which I emphasize is not all-encompassing).
That's the thing, God has no "original form", He is Spirit.
Spiritual sight is best described as "wisdom/understanding"
But let's ask ourselves; is not using our eyes, looking through a microscope as we observe the world around us (science), which is then transferred into digital signals and read by us the mind an understanding?
But look what religion, or more like what "religious science" has done, it has convinced us/mind that we don't have a mind. That we only have a brain which mimics, or creates this illusion of a mind. So now the "mind/spirit" of man is reduced to the brain, when the brain can't do any more "seeing" than our Gluteus Maximus can.
When Jesus said that: "God is Spirit, .. no one has seen God at any time, those that want to worship/know/understand God must worship Him In The spirit", what he meant was that we must stop being so carnal, so "physical minded", so "worldly, finite" but return to our real self, our spiritual self and reason outside of what was stored in our brain. In other words, we are to stop thinking that "what we see with our physical eyes is It", but instead we are to look at everything with our spiritual eyes, which is an "understanding/wisdom".
RollTide420 - Some of the best evidence for God come from the social sciences (which are considered distinct from "hard sciences," or "natural sciences" in that social sciences are based on trends and not proven experiments).
Social sciences, like: the scientific study of human society and social relationships? No my friend, we would study "religion" with that, not for any evidence of God. And like I said before, no "Religion" knows Infinite/God. But as I noted above, we are the mind/spirit, and we can observe both the created and the Uncreated with our mind, as long as we understand what our mind is, or actually "who" our mind is?
RollTide420 - DNA functions very much like a language, as well as many other features of a universe which strongly point to a creator. But linking the linguistic nature of DNA to a creator is a philosophical argument, not a scientific one. The fallacy of scientism is that they believe science to be all encompassing.
Science is "all encompassing", but NOT how the religious pseudoscientists think it is. They claim that the physical realm is all there is, that what we can see and detect physically is the only thing that exists, not realizing, or more like intentionally ignoring that what they cannot see with their physical eyes is the actual reality, it is this invisible mind who is actually the scientist who is observing the created! The finite, which was created. It is that which is "not real", and the life/spirit/mind is what is real.
So what points to a creator, the automated robot making cars in a factory, that robot creator, or the creator that made that robot?
Let's consider this:
That robot in a factory has a brain, it is chips with a processor, and it was programmed by a creator.
The human body/robot has a brain too, which, .. which what? .. which was "programmed, just like the automated robot was by us the spirit/mind.
But since we/mind/spirit did not create our body, that first body, then a Mind/Spirit like ours must have. There is no other option, except make up some fairytale and claim it as science!?
It is we/mind/spirit that does all the programming of our brain. Then we command the action of our whole body through the master control panel the brain to build another creator like that robot in the factory. Then we use the keyboard to "program" the brain/memory of the robot.
Just as the memory chip in the robot didn't, or couldn't program itself, our brain can't program itself either.
So now the real question is: "what is the mind, and where did the mind/spirit of man come from?"
So let's be scientific about it and observe:
We humans have done just about everything possible (sort to speak) to reanimate a dead human body. We know that once the spirit/mind leaves that body, even if we keep pumping warm oxygenated blood through it, keeping that brain alive, that brain will not do anything on its own. The spirit is gone, while the body is still there. The "person" is gone, or left the body.
RollTide420 - With that being said, I still don't see a fundamental difference between infinite and infinity. Yes God is infinite, but when you say this, what you are saying is that all of his qualities "go into infinity." For the rest of us, if he allows some of our qualities to go into infinity, but not all, then those qualities are infinite, but not us, as some of our other qualities are limited, and therefore we are not completely infinite. God, however, has no finite qualities. All of his qualities extend into infinity, which is why is the only being which can be said to be infinite. However, the quality of his being infinite is because all of his qualities "go into infinity" and therefore the point remains that infinite and infinity are merely different conjugations of the same root word.
Is it; "God's infinity qualities", .. OR "Gods Infinite qualities" ?
Is it; "Gods infinity love, or Gods love that goes throughout infinity", OR "Gods Infinite love"?
You see, "God IS love", it is "God's Infinite wisdom", Not "Gods infinity wisdom" or any shape of infinity.
We agree; God alone IS Infinite, and visa-versa.
As for us, the only "Infinite" about us is what God gave of Himself; the breath of life which is our mind.
But what God did was put that mind in a finite body, in a finite brain, and like you said about the DNA is what "forms" our character, which changes with each consecutive generation. No two people are alike. The body influences the way we think, which forms our mind, our character, this is what differentiates us from God.
Ecclesiastes 12: 6Remember your Creator before the silver cord is loosed,
Or the golden bowl is broken,
Or the pitcher shattered at the fountain,
Or the wheel broken at the well.
7 Then the dust will return to the earth as it was,
And the spirit will return to God who gave it.
  Considerate: 88%  
  Substantial: 82%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 89%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.18  
  Sources: 4  
  Relevant (Beta): 27%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 78%  
  Substantial: 83%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.44  
  Sources: 1  
  Relevant (Beta): 66%  
  Learn More About Debra
So what you're telling me is that, scientifically speaking, you don't have a spirit/mind because some atheist scientists never cared to consider it. That all you have is only a brain, which with the eye reads what I just wrote, and through billions and billions of years of careless, unintentional, chaotic accumulated selection from your environment and the food you ate, the brain responds. But not because of free will*, but because it has no choice, it just reacts from it's envoronment to what it read, or what it hears, .. is this correct?
If so, then I have a few questions for you?
If not, then please explain to me, like in "Evolution for Dummies" style what "science" has determined of this thing we humans call "mind" to be?
Like the common repeatable saying: "Have you lost your mind?" How come even you evolutionist don't come back with a: "What the heck are you talking about, .. mind? What is this 'mind' that you think I lost? How can I lose something that doesn't even exist?"
Oh, and yes, the "mind" IS objective, repeatable, measured, peer reviewed, all done with the "mind".
Oh really?
Here is a simple "scientific experiment" you can do to explain why that happens!? Take a bat to your computer, and see how you with your perfectly healthy mind/spirit could get out of the smashed up computer memory (as in brain damage), the monitor (as in eyes/seeing), and the responses you get (as in a busted lip, tongue half cut off) as you type a response to me?
Yes, "brain damage" can really screw up what the mind/spirit is trying to say, or do, .. you don't need to have a degree in science to realize that.
So using common sense responses/answers to what I have "observed in the world around me" (as in science) is mysticism for you?
"Hey guys, I'm a mystic now, a guru! I'll just shave my head and throw an orange bedsheet around me, cross my legs, sit on the sidewalk and teach!"
Seriously Coveny, if the frozen guy comes back to life, is because the spirit hasn't let the body yet. He/spirit still sees a potential, a small glimpse of hope in the cells that are still alive for him to stay in.
http://zidbits.com/2011/02/can-a-human-be-frozen-and-brought-back-to-life/
- Despite the fact that no human placed in a cryonic suspension has yet been revived, some living organisms can be, and have been, brought back from a dead or near-dead state.
We can keep a heart pumping, or even a brain from corruption, but no "life" as in spirit/soul has ever taken possession of them. It's all a Big-Bang Evolutionist sci-fi dream to "Be like the Most High". A Frankenstein dream.
You didn't read what I wrote, that is exactly what I said; that God "breathed" His Spirit into a body He made out of quantum dust particles, and man became a living soul. That it is this body that gives the spirit its individual character which as I said changes from generation to generation.
Yes, I believe if the spirit of the man with organ transplant want's to stay, God will let him. But as you can see, not too many "spirit/mind's" are so corrupted, so lost, so distanced from God that they would be willing to stay at all costs, where even he is willing to get parts from a pig, or other animals just to stay alive!? These people are trying to "climb the fence", to gain eternal life, or even to prolong their rich lifestyle knowing what's waiting for them on the "other side"; (please see Christ's Lazarus and the Rich man story)
Man, again you didn't read what I said.
I never said our body is a video game, I likened our body to a video game characters body.
Just as the video-game-character was created, designed by its creator with limitations decided by the creator, our own human body was created, intelligently designed by our Creator.
We are like our Heavenly Father, little gods, little creators, why He calls us children. So you can imagine the pain, the hurt it causes our Father to deny Him like you are doing here?
And yes, without a programmer/spirit/mind to place a program into the memory in our computer, it will be as intelligent as our brain without the spirit/mind, which means zilch, nothing, dumb as a rock.
Yes, the brain "firing electrically" IS the evidence that someone is reading and responding to those messages. I mentioned how we can even touch an electrode to different parts of the brain to make that persons hands, his legs etc. move. This is another "proof" that an outside force is controlling the body through the brain.
I guess people making pacts with Lucifer/Satan is more acceptable, right?
Please, .. stop with the demonically possessed; claiming god talked to them! So you even know what "god" they were referring to? Because it sure as hell wasn't our Creator/God that Moses was talking to.
Please look at this video (I know you won't, so this is for our fellow debaters who might also read this)
They all admit opening up to demonic possessions, so unless you have some other point you want to make, can you ate least watch, read, listen to what I said and respond to that?
Thanks.
  Considerate: 67%  
  Substantial: 95%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 88%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.86  
  Sources: 3  
  Relevant (Beta): 95%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 61%  
  Substantial: 95%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 5.74  
  Sources: 8  
  Relevant (Beta): 89%  
  Learn More About Debra
@Coveny - We can prove people have a mind, all we need do is open up their skull. I don’t believe in a spirit because no one ever considered it, I don’t believe in a spirit because there is no proof.
I can just see you as a 6th grade science teacher who brings in a jar to class with a brain in it, and telling the class: "I have brought in a brain of a criminal, now I will cut a piece from it so we can 'see' what was on his mind, .. also we will analyze how a criminal thinks!"
No one considered a spirit? Maybe on your spinning, and twirling through the vacuum of space globe they haven't, but here on Flat Earth it seems that's all people talk about.
I never seen anyone take a chunk of a brain out for a discussion and talk about it, .. have you? Never mind, I already know your answer because I can read your brain.
Coveny - You show again you don’t understand evolution.
Wait, so your mind is your brain and you're sharing 'chunks' of your thoughts with me? Ouch! Gives a whole new meaning to: "Let me digest that thought for a minute"
No, it is the "brain" that's the biological computer, where us the mind/spirit store info into, and send messages through by which to control the body with. This is common sense knowledge from observing the actual physical brain, and listening, reading what all the different "mind/spirits" throughout history had to say. Only Dr. Frankenstein would be sick enough to 'debate' with a brain, take chunks of it to share it with others. That's sick, only an animal would do that, like apes, chimps who eat other chimps brains.
Coveny - Yes the mind is objective, repeatable, measurable, peer reviewed, etc. Science even understands how to turn you off by destroy certain parts of it.
Yes, Dahmer became an expert in that. Same thing happens when you drill holes in your computer, you'll start seeing all kinds of weird things happening, even though you the mind/person controlling it is perfectly healthy.
Here is another video you will not watch, yet shows that it is not the brain that is in control, but the mind (Note! The video is actually misinformation, assuming the mind doesn't exist, but proves my point instead!)
The "brain" would never have responded like that to the hammer hitting the rubber arm! It would have reacted only to stimuli, when the hammer would have actually hit his hand. No stimuli, no reaction. Another 'evidence' for the "mind".
Ah, this is getting tiresome. How in h*% would the message you are sending through a broken computer not be effected?
Have you EVER used a walkie-talkie as a kid and get all kinds of distortion? Is that your speech that is getting slurred, or it's the medium you are sending your message through that's at fault?
I mean you wouldn't run to your friend you are talking with and ask him if he was OK or not, right? ", I got worried there for a second, you started sounding really freakish! You OK?"
Pastor Dawkins never "compared' humans to animals, he said that humans ARE animals, .. that he IS an animal
God created the animals and man from the dust of the earth, same material, same Designer, only man was created different in glory/type. Animals are different than humans, (I know, "Whaaa? Naaaw!" right?) and humans are different than Angels and so on. Same with the sun, the moon and the stars, each was created different.
From "observation" it is obvious that the body design limits the spirit, so if you/spirit/soul were put into that body like this bird, that's as far as you would be able to go.
No, there is no "spirit" in the body part, just like if you put a faster processor in one computer over another, the one with the faster will run faster, right? (I noticed this myself from scientific observation lol) It will not effect either the programmer of the slower computer, nor the programmer of the faster computer, the faster will just get better or faster results/processing.
Same with an animal brain vs. a human brain, the processor in the human brain be like:
728380-B21 | HP BL660c Gen9 Intel Xeon E5-4669v3
(2.1GHz/18-core/45MB/135W)
and the birds be like the TRS-80, or the Commodore 64 processor.
Aww, that quote on that camp cell wall is soo meaningful, it brings tears to my eyes (pun intended). .. Right, so the Jews want God on His knees, that is IF He exists? Yes, the Jews, .. the World Leaders on Homosexual/Gay rights, homosexuality in movies and prime-time TV shows etc.
Yes my Jewish brothers; world leaders in atheism, and comedy that specifically mocks God and His son Jesus Christ, .. yes God will "beg for your forgiveness", .. right after you "beg for forgiveness for crucifying His son Jesus Christ!" But not just Jews (who by the way were His chosen People), but everyone who has ever committed a sin.
I hear this B.S. all the time, especially the Oh-So-Righteous Jews, and the almighty Nazis. I mean really, Jews and Nazis together against the God of Abraham, now how ironic is that? What's that called again? Oh yeah, my daughter used to say: "frienemies".
The pain is when Organized Religion takes over anything; books, science, philosophy, governments, law .. that is anything we value, and interprets it through their own agenda.
Bodies designed by an ?? I believe you're thinking of the Bruce/Caitlyn sex change aren't you? Because I agree, only an could do something like that.
http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/files/2015/06/BRUCEJENNER.jpg
Or these work of arts:
especially time 1:11
Coveny - Pacts with Lucifer/satan? Why can you not get this? I don’t believe in ANY of your imaginary friends. I’m an atheist. If I believed in satan, then I wouldn’t be an atheist. I’m not talking about demons either, I do NOT believe in any of your imaginary friends. These are problems that are created because of damage to the physical mind. They create situations where something like a dream is real to them, and happens while they are awake. It effects MILLIONS of people in this country alone.
"Damage to the physical mind", .. , this would explain why you keep denying the existence of things that you keep talking about, and even describing, and evaluating, like their creative abilities!? How long have you had this problem arguing against things and beings you swear don't exist?
You know what, without the care of a professional, let's just move on!? OK?
Coveny - I’m NOT watching an hour and a half propaganda piece. State your case, don’t get other people to defend positions you hold, but you can’t articulate, and it’s a sign that you don’t understand the beliefs you hold because you can't put them in your own words. I read what you write (until you start preaching the gospel at me), and respond to that.
Which cult do you belong to, since it's obvious they have you following some very strict guidelines? "Don't watch that, just say: "that's propaganda!"" or "Close your eyes, that's a quote from the Bible, just say 'That's preaching!' and pretend it wasn't even there!"
Any show of evidence? pretend it never happened, deny everything and turn it back on your opponent and say "show me evidence", .. do this every time any evidence is presented.
Wait, that is exactly what the Jesuit Order/Oath video I've shown you reveals, .. no wonder you didn't watch it! Sly-dog you!
And last but not least, again and again, and again, .. I am not talking about any religion, or speaking from an Organized Religious perspective like Christianity. But never mind, you have been sooo indoctrinated that you could never understand what I'm telling you unless you step out of your religious views and beliefs long enough to be able to understand.
  Considerate: 54%  
  Substantial: 97%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 90%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.54  
  Sources: 4  
  Relevant (Beta): 86%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 70%  
  Substantial: 95%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.56  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 96%  
  Learn More About Debra
Your version of "see what's on his mind" is what pseudoscience does with the fMRI, looking at the neurons firing off on the brain.
What is actually happening is us the mind reading those firings off the brain, which is seeing/understanding with our mind, us-spirit.
Software? .. so who programmed the software?
Yes, the spirit/mind is us, me and you, but to keep focused, we/us/spirit/mind keep record in our brain. The body itself stores info in the brain, it forms who we are starting in the womb. Otherwise without the body we'd be "spirit", .. all over the place since we are infinite.
Even God Himself keeps a record: (Daniel 7:10 and Revelation 20:12) Just as each of His creations keep records, and since He is God, all this information is available to Him.
A mind that believes he is a brain, is a waste.
Jesus called it "dead", even walking and talking they are dead, and he said that "Let the dead burry the dead". Yes, walking zombies, everyone who believes that their brain is who they are, are zombies.
No, science is being interpreted wrong, all because they want to stay with the Evolution Religion. The video proves my point, that if we were the brain, then it would respond to stimuli, not be startled by fakeness. BUT, we the mind can be startled, we can be manipulated if we don't "keep watch", and before you know it, not only do we believe we are animals, but start acting like them because we figure hey, .. animals don't have any moral codes, only survival, so if you were to kill me and my whole family, an Evolutionist Lawyer will fight for your "animal rights" and blame it on your environment, and the food you ate. Or, blame it on your ape ancestors and show a documentary how apes/chimps kill and eat their own sometimes.
Coveny - Many of our reactions are not conscious thoughts, they are subconscious, and we react before we consciously register the stimuli. Also some damage doesn’t cause pain because it destroys the nerve ending, or various other reasons, so if your eye register it you will react to it before you “feel” it. Children LOVE to call other children “scared” because they react like this, but it’s a primitive survival trait.
The mind just want's to have fun, so things like keeping the heart beating we, or I should say God put that part of us/mind in the brain on a loop. If our body needs more oxygen, the subconscious reacts and makes adjustments without having to take our main focus away from the fun activity. But you know we CAN take charge of the subconscious mind, and slow the heart down if we choose.
Look, I will not argue with an Evolutionist who thinks he is a brain. Learn what your Pastor Dawkins taught you; that "you don't have free will", you are a victim of your environment, and the food you eat, now stay with that teaching and tell me how your brain can create things it never seen before? Or tell me how you are able to debate with me here, switching to completely different subjects, or even multiple subjects within seconds if your brain is "evolving" your responses as Dawkins says?
What? Who said your mind changes into a music player if you got hit on the head and damaged your brain? I said that just like a computer if damaged, the brain will react the same way, the mind will be unable to get the message out that we intended, or the way we intended. Same with the damaged computer, the "programmer/mind" will not get the results he wanted.
Increase with brain damage? Oh, so that's why the deadly inoculations of infants, to see what new evolved creature the poor child will become when he/she turns autistic? Unbelievable, sick minded religious fanatics, experimenting on children.
Lol, .. all one has to do is look in the mirror to see that we are not animals. Even human infants can tell the difference between animals and humans. The same goes with animals, just go into a gorillas cage, or a lions den and you'll see for yourself.
I remember when the doctor told us that we should remove my boys tonsils because we human-animals no longer need them! That we only needed them when we grazed grass as cows, or whatever animal my boy evolved from!?
This is scary, imagine going under the knife of an Evolutionist/atheist surgeon. You are out, laying there for a minor laminectomy, and he starts cutting parts out that he feels you no longer need!
Coveny - If you can’t look around the world and see the HORRIBLE way the world is, you are blind. If you believed in a creator the thing would have to be the cruelest entity in existence. I see SO many theists who praise their gods for any good thing, while completely ignoring all the bad things. Gods public relations representative is doing an AMAZINNG job. I mean really all powerful, all knowing, and bad things aren’t his fault????
Coveny - Oh yes, if our bodies were “designed” they were designed by an . Other animals have a different pipe for eating and breathing, yet 1,000s of humans die every year because of that design. Sinus cavities do nothing but cause pain…. What thought pain was a good idea? And zero physical weapons? Where are the claws? Soft easily damaged skin? Really a bad design on all fronts.
Chem-trail the hell out of the skies to cause as much harm to our ecosystem as possible (you ever wonder why they don't chem-trail the hell out of all the Bio-Domes?), poison our drinking water, food, plants to grow vegetables that can last years and taste like plastic and have 0 nutrition value, amputate for minor infections so to offer them bionic extremities so you could somehow justify "how bad Gods design is"!?, prosthetics that cause immeasurable pain and infections that are hidden from the public, .. tell them; "You Have Cancer" whether or not they have it so you can reduce the population through deadly therapy fulfilling a demonic agenda like Agenda 21 and 2030, .. rob us Trillions of dollars for imaginary science fiction stories claimed as science, and offer some delusional hope on a fake desolate planet that supposedly has poison gas for air, .. but hey, that's better than this:
Right?
Anything is better than Gods creation earth and our human body, right? Even this:
Now what grave robbing, skull and bones worshipping, demonically possessed moron would suggest we leave this earth and run and "populate" a CGI cartoon planet like in that video by 2050, huh?
I mean the Star Wars planet Tatooine is better than that, why not go there? Or Planet Vulcan, or any of the other Star Wars, or Star Trek planets? Why a dead, airless sandstorm ridden hellhole like Mars?
Coveny - Denying the existence of things, YOU and others keep talking about. If theists would stop pushing their agenda, raping, torturing, and murdering, then I could stop talking about unicorns. I look forward to the day it happens. How long have I been dealing with it? Since I was a child and theists couldn’t tell me why god created evil. (never been a fan of torture and murdering… ie evil)
Coveny - I think a professional might be a bad idea for you. We lock people up now who say they can talk to god. We’ve stop being superstitious, and now we are locking up more and more theists for following the bible rather than good morals.
Oh please, .. you know well that the ONLY reason we still have some morals left on this world is because of the Bible. Once you lock us up, and chop our heads off in the name of your goddess ISIS, and burn all the Bibles, the projection movie "The Purge" would best describe your "Godless-world" raping, torturing, and murdering as you said. You should hear the hate in your speech?
Umm, .. yes it is. It's a big part of presenting your evidence. So PLEASE, .. by all means, pick your favorite sermon from Dawkins and lets debate it?
So the Spider-Man comic is the evidence for Thor? OK then.
Coveny - When you understand why you don’t believe in thor, you’ll understand why I don’t believe in yahweh. When you understand why you don’t want to watch a video “proving” thor exists, you’ll understand why I don’t want to watch a video “proving” Yahweh exists.
Coveny - And last but not least, again, again, again, again… I don’t CARE that you claim that you aren’t part of a religion, you believe in a creator I do not. You think it somehow adds more credence to your faith because you aren’t part of organized religion? Who cares? You are the same as pagans, or 100s of other theist that don’t have organized religion, not to mention it’s like you have copied and pasted from Jim Jones, and I think we all know how that turned out. You want SO badly to be special, and smart, but you are just like all the rest following blindly along, and looking down on other theists who don’t believe in the same fairy tale you do.
Hey, I would never look down on anyone, .. pointing out your errors is not looking down on you, OK? And if you want to believe in what you believe in, fine, just don't try to force it on anyone, OK? Because your religious beliefs sounds very dangerous, like Marshal Applewhite, or like the NASA idea to "colonize Mars", .. you know what I mean?
  Considerate: 66%  
  Substantial: 94%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 91%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.18  
  Sources: 2  
  Relevant (Beta): 85%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 44%  
  Substantial: 98%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 90%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 5.94  
  Sources: 2  
  Relevant (Beta): 92%  
  Learn More About Debra
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danthropology/2015/11/study-finds-that-children-raised-without-religion-show-more-empathy-and-kindness/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=FBCP-PATH&utm_content=pathmainpage
  Considerate: 89%  
  Substantial: 15%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.36  
  Sources: 1  
  Relevant (Beta): 17%  
  Learn More About Debra
The scientific method is based on causality. The scientific nethod lays out the step for proving things through experimentation. In all experiments there is an independent variable and a dependent variable. The relationship between these two is that a change in the independent variable will CAUSE a change in the dependent variable. Without this CAUSAL relationship the scientific method is nothing. Can you give me an example where the scientific method is used for something besides proving a causal reltionship?
While I was technically incorrect regarding force, the concept that an effect need adequate cause remains in effect. For any force not used, an adequate force substitute, such and equates torque in your example must be used. The fact that there anydequatesre equations for how much force and torque is neefed to move a given object show that a cause must be sufficient for its effect.
Saying gravity slowly pulling things together in the first cause doesn't solve anything. First off, what caused gravity to suddenly start pulling when it hadn't before? Also this doesn't at all solve the paradox of infinity never being reached due to it taking an infinte time to get to the present, with no regard to zero (a mathematical impossibility). Also, math does apply in the real world. Physic relies on math, so if math doesnt apply in the real world, than physics doesn't apply. Could you provide an example of the laws of math being broken I n the real world, since you claim math doesn't apply in the real world?
The paradox shows that there is an exception to causality. We've never observed one, but this paradox proves there is. This demonitrates that there not only might be something beyond what we can observe, but there definitely is something beyond what we can observe scientifically, so in order to prove God, other subjects just be introduced. Mathemeticians, unlike scientists don't have to rely on unproven theoris such as evolution or big bang. The concepts discussed amongst matheticians are proven beyond question, and bus to examples of them being broken can be found.
It's not a false dichotomy, either time had a beginning (and therefore a cause), or it didn't. If gravity caused things, something would need to initiate it. If it was already there, it would have been pulling before it caused anything, and it's pull would've caused the change before, but there is no before and you are still left with a paradox.
Also, an infinite loop in time defies the laws of math, which if dismissed then physics, which relies on math, can also be dismissed. Time can be measured mathematically, it could give you exact dates of events. Our precision in measuring time still has room for improvement but our accuracy is fine.
Since time is measured mathematically, it must follow the laws of math. No such loop can be demonstrated on a number line. Infinity always moves away from negative infinity, not back to it. 0 to positive infinity, the mathematical basis for my worldview can be shown on a numberline.
The proof that the first cause is outside the universe is that nothing in our universe has been shown to be uncaused, but since something must be due to aforementioned paradox, the only way out is that the uncaused thing was outside of our universe.
Since the scientific method alway demonstrates a causal relationship, then dismissing causality dismisses the scientific method. I never said it was bogus, I said your claim that causality doesn't apply to what we can observe scientifically renders it bogus if true, which I don't believe it to be. God is able to defy causality because he is beyond what the scientific method can demonstrate.
In regards to time not "effecting" anything, universal causation says everything is caused, not that it causes other things. Also, since no event can happen unless time moves forward for it to happen, so in th at sense time helps to cause everything, so no it is not outside of causality.
Just because we don't know everything about how to measure time doesn't mean it can't be measured. The fact that we have made any progress into measuring time shows it can be measured. Also while we might not know everthing about times relationships to other aspects of physics doesn't mean we can't observe or measure it. Days, years, even minutes are quite easy to measure. I'd bet my clock and yours tell the same time, adjusted for the effect of time zone, precise down to the minute. While our precision may be lacking, our accuracy is not. How long ago a given point in time was isn't debated, it's simply counted.
Positive and negative charges aren't inherently negative or positive, we assign the two arbitrarily. If you switchied them, it would come out the same. This doesn't hold true for true positives and negatives. If you switched the positives and negative around in math, you end up with all sorts of dilemmas such as the positive/negative relationship in multiplication or the concept of how imaginary numbers when you get the square roots of negatives work.
Also antimatter and all that theoretical stuff hasn't been proven. Scientists don't know what antimatter is, nor have they observed it so antimatter really isn't hard science, it's theoretical physics.
When you thinking of two concepts you cannot measure them in the same way you can physical thing, you can only compare them. Measurements require a unite of measurement. One such unit for distance is feet. One for time is minutes. What unit of measurement do you use for thoughts? There isn't one.
When you say it's high end science that your not digging up, are you admitting you haven't done you research here? Most of the high end science you refer to is theoretical physics, the key word being theortetical. If you can't explain the science, don't expect anyone to buy it.
Infinity and negative infinity are two distinct numbers. Just like 3 and negative 3, the occupy distinct roles on the number line. If you substitute negative infinite for infinity, or vise versa, on a math test, you will usually end up with an incorrect answer. Infinity goes both ways but not as an single entity. There is a positive and a negative. They are distinct and you cannot get from one to the other without crossing zero. Infinity is not all abstract imiginary numbers. "i" is an abstract imiginary number. It is the square root of negative one. It is never represented on a regular number line whereas infinity and negative infinity often are.
What does the lack of precision on you car measurements have to do with the way zero behaves on a graph? The positive and negative you referenced were in regards to your cars direction of movements not othe random aspects of it. Zero is significant to this discussion because it is the starting post of numbers and it must be crossed in order too get from negative infinity to infinity on a numberline Since you claim time had no beginning or end, and has no starting point, your numberline for time goes from negative infinity to infinity without crossing zero. This is numerically impossible.
0 must be crossed to get from negative infinity to infinity on any axis. The shape of the graph doesn't matter, you can't get from negative infinity to infinity without crossing 0, which is the points the axes are located so you would cross at least one axis.
Not everything that affects the universe is in the universe and affected by causation. The mind cannot be observed or proven in a lab, and physically it does not exist. Yet it affects our universe.
I'm not only going with the observable universe, I'm using the observable universe to show that there is more to existence than our observable universe. Also, math isn't theoretical, it's concepts are proven beyond question.
Also, my facts are indisputable and you didnt adequately refute them let's go through them again.
1) I'd bet you've never seen energy either. Physical doesn't mean visual. We may not have perfected precision in regards to time, just like we haven't perfected precision in measuring distance or energy. However we can measure it accurately. I can literally call someone in China and ask them what time it is in my time zone, and they could figure it out on their own with relative ease. Not too difficult too measure.
2) you ignore the entire basis of my argument here. Since time cannot be infinite as shown by the numberline. The paradox of causation shows that there must be an exception. Since no exceptions exist in the observable universe, the exception must exist outside of the universe. It needs no cause as it is outside of causality. It need not be proceeded it need not be caused.
Also you didn't dispute this fact merely it's application. You say I have zero facts. Pleasee look up the term zero in a dictionary.
3) Actually your starting poin is starting till zero. Firstly, the minumum number of fingers someone can be born with isn't 10, it's zero. Some people are born without fingers. More importantly EVERYONE is conceived with zero fingers. You start with nothing, not 10 fingers. The fingers are gained in the womb and their presence is not the starting state for us. My post zero here, is zero.
4) My point here is that negatives don't exist physically. Again you don't dispute this fact, merely it's application. Please look the word zero up if you are going to continue to use it.
5) Please give me an example where dreams are a factor used in a an equation that physicists actually take seriously. Time is used in these all the time, the most basic being distance divided by time equals speed. Dreams are not found in any uch equations and physicists never use dreams as a factor, whereas time is used all the time. Your comparison point here is fundementally different than time in regards to the topic at hand.
6) Lines don't display weird begavior at 0, but it's integral does. It's still significant. If math doesnt prove anything when I use it, then it doesnt prove anything when physicists use it. Physics relies on math. If math doesnt prove anything, than physics doesn't prove anything. So is physics bogus to you? It relies on math and you claim math proves nothing, so how can physics prove anything using math?
7) You don't dispute my fact, just the application. You say I have zero facts. Again, please look up what zero means.
8) Numerically infinity is never reached. Pi is not infinity, it merely has an infinite number of digits behind the decimal. It serves a seperate mathethematical fiction. Pi is, by definition, less than 4. Infinity is, by definition greater than 4. That's one key difference. Also, pi it fonts not just a concept, pi is a real number that falls between 3 and 4. It occupies a specific place on the numberline. If you substitute pi for infinity, or vice versa, on a math test, you will lose points. This is not considered an acceptable subtitution as the two are not equal.
Also, it isn't correct to pick any point on the numberline and call it infinite. Any given point you pick, you have a finite, countable number. If you substitute some random number for infinity, or vice versa, on a math test, you will lose points. This is not considered an acceptable substitution as the two are not equal.
9) I don't claim God has been around for an infinite time. Since a cause must precede its effects, and God caused time, God preceded time. In order to precede something, you have to exist independently of it. God therefore exists independently of the concept of time. He hasn't been around for an infinite among of time as his existence is independent of time.
  Considerate: 88%  
  Substantial: 96%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.54  
  Sources: 2  
  Relevant (Beta): 56%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 86%  
  Substantial: 87%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 90%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.28  
  Sources: 3  
  Relevant (Beta): 14%  
  Learn More About Debra