sizemik

Joined

• started 145 topics
• posted 5,292 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by sizemik

• 
  76

  I used to be a JW! Shocking, I know

  by NewChapter in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it's true.

  i used to be a jw.

  i was duped.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  Wot nugget and the Wizard said . . .

  The only people qualified to invoke Cofty's law are ex-JW. The people least equipped to make such a judgement are ex-JW's.

  Work that one out.
• 
  83

  I'm Happy to be Back

  by snowbird in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i've been in the vale of deep shadows, but am feeling more and more like myself.. i'm grateful to my doctors and modern medicine.. sylvia.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  Welcome back Syl . . .

  We really did miss you.
• 
  170

  Simple answer, please! Scientifically explain the origin of life coming from nothing!

  by Silent_Scream in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  scientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.

  science is observable, science is reproducible.

  a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  But I never claimed that life came from nothing---so why would I have to prove that? I claimed I don't know how life originated, and that I can prove. It is you who keep insisting that I claim life came from nothing---therefore it is a strawman argument. When I make the claim that life came from nothing, you can ask me to prove it. . . . NC

  ok. . . . SS

  (sound of penny dropping?)
• 
  170

  Simple answer, please! Scientifically explain the origin of life coming from nothing!

  by Silent_Scream in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  scientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.

  science is observable, science is reproducible.

  a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  Since atheism would suggest thats the case . . . SS

  Atheism doen't suggest anything . . . the penny still hasn't dropped.
• 
  170

  Simple answer, please! Scientifically explain the origin of life coming from nothing!

  by Silent_Scream in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  scientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.

  science is observable, science is reproducible.

  a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  I could take all the elements of the house (wood, metal, glass, etc) and find origins elsewhere, but to come together in something as well crafted and able to be utilized as a house, people would think I'm crazy if I said no one built it. . . . SS

  You might as well go back to the KH. . . . SS

  Ahem

  This turned into a joke thread! . . . SS

  I think it always was.
• 
  170

  Simple answer, please! Scientifically explain the origin of life coming from nothing!

  by Silent_Scream in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  scientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.

  science is observable, science is reproducible.

  a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  It's like "I don't know how life got started, but I know it wasn't a God". That's contradictory, and just as bad as people believing in God while dismissing scientific reality.

  If any where to think like that . . . then your point is valid.

  Speaking only for myself it's like "I don't know how life got started, but I don't see any evidence for it being the work of an identifiable God" No contradiction. Also, no valid reason for not questioning theistic claims.
• 
  170

  Simple answer, please! Scientifically explain the origin of life coming from nothing!

  by Silent_Scream in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  scientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.

  science is observable, science is reproducible.

  a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  So why is there so many atheistic/theistic arguments?

  If this is your real problem . . . then why did you start another one?
• 
  170

  Simple answer, please! Scientifically explain the origin of life coming from nothing!

  by Silent_Scream in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  scientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.

  science is observable, science is reproducible.

  a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  My request was simple.

  I see . . .

  True, myself nor any other theist cannot provide scientific evidences for a Creator.

  But neither can atheists provide scientific evidence of any alternative of origin of life.

  Like you said - SO WHAT? (yet atheists jump down the throat of anyone believing in a creator, at least here on JWN) I don't like hypocrisy.

  Maybe your request was not that simple after all?

  If you genuinely want answers . . . there are better places to look than here.
• 
  239

  The Great Debate: "Has Science Refuted Religion?

  by dark angle in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  just want to share this amazing debate!

  caltech cosmologist and physicist sean carroll teams up with skeptic magazine publisher and science historian michael shermer in this epic debate with noted conservative author and king's college president dinesh d'souza and mit physicist ian hutchinson as they go head-to-head over one of the most controversial issues of our age.

  as science pushes deeper into territory once the province of religion, with questions such as why there is something rather than nothing?, where did the universe come from?, how did life arise?, what was the origin of morality?, and others, inevitable conflicts arise over the best approach to answer them.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  While there may be an argument that matter interacts with its surroundings seeking vibrational harmony it might be a stretch to say that atoms beget atoms?

  No argument there . . . but then it all changes again at a molecular level . . . which is still a long way from what we commonly recognise today as "living". The threshold for "life" is not the clear-cut definition some imagine.
• 
  170

  Simple answer, please! Scientifically explain the origin of life coming from nothing!

  by Silent_Scream in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  scientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.

  science is observable, science is reproducible.

  a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sizemik

  Atheists, next time you would like to post your ideas/"facts"/"evidence", remember sizemik's words. At some stage you need to take responsibility for what your own mind decides, and get used to the fact that very few people will give a shit as to what that actually is.

  A redundant reminder.