Why is it so hard for you to accept that evolution is fact?

Would you characterize the universe as being more orderly or chaotic? Open question, to everybody

The only reason we don't see antimatter nowadays is because we haven't discovered how to control it yet, and it's emitting at such a slow or small rate that we can't take notice of it.

For example: One of your household items is emitting antimatter right now.

A banana, every few minutes or so, emits a positron(the antimatter form of an electron). But one nanosecond after, it gives a high-five with its buddy, the electron, and both dissolve into nothing.

I disagree with your first point. More or less is really all that's quantifiable with our limited view of the universe. It's absolute quantities and values that are elusive.

To your second point, I agree that order predominates.

I like these types of conversations.

It feels like 7th grade Core at OHS.

Interesting to know.

On what scale is macro and what scale is micro?

So the large is defined by the small and the small is defined by the large. It's all relative after all

One more agnostic made. There's no human basis for absolutism.

What about galaxy clusters? And every time they put more energy into a particle collider, they discover new smaller particles? As above, so below. There are no absolutes when it comes to size, especially since you can't tell me what the limits are between small and large.

I did ask you what qualifies as macro and micro.

are we talking about chess?

How do you know that fundamental particles exist?

'Night

This topic is very interesting, I'm glad the op thought about this

You’re welcome.

I’ve enjoyed reading the thread. I would ask that we avoid ragging on named members of other forums. I don’t like them either, and we want to be above their level of discourse.

As far as the ‘who created God’ argument, it involves a misunderstanding of ‘God’ as a concept. Most people confuse ‘God’ with ‘demiurge’. Demiurge refers, if you will, to “Joe God”, the personal God with white beard who roles up His Divine Sleeves and sets the Big Bang Bong in motion. He’s well-meaning but he makes lots of mistakes. No wonder people don’t care much for Him.

God is a much more abstract term. Interestingly, the world religions that postulate a divine ‘something’ all tend to agree on this. God did not create time and He is not outside of time. He is time. He didn’t invent math. He is math. He didn’t produce light and love. He is Light and Love.

This is enough to trigger a migraine in any thoughtful person, and I’ll leave it at that. If you want to pursue this, the writings of David Bentley Hart would be who to read.

chess.com/club/the-official-unofficial-off-topic-forums-club

So, you and E***** are going to hit the pub together? Good on you if it’s true.

People acknowledge the same God whether or not they realize it. For example, Carl Sagan spoke of the Cosmos in pretty much religious terms, though it didn’t occur to him that he was.

In the final analysis people fuss about the personality and the intentionality of God. Can God break His own rules? Is God feminine? Is He or She the slightest bit interested in the affairs of men and women? Does the God of quantum mechanics really care about if you cheat on your taxes, or spouse for that matter? Did He create supernatural beings, such as jinn, or angels, or Nandi, or Michael, or fill in the blanks. Is He a deist God, or a Baal-like God, or a transcendent God, an Immanent God, or both Immanent and transcendent?

A full discussion is outside the scope of this forum of course, but if you discuss it civilly I may look the other way.

Evolution fails to account for the law of Entropy which we have proven first hand instead of speculated about. Things do not move from disorder to order

At least, not naturally. Which means an external force would have to have caused it, it couldn’t have happened on its own

On a worldly scientific standpoint perhaps, yet

REALITY

clarifies a much brighter perception.