Word magic my friends. My friend was quite right, not only are you afraid to open your minds a little bit, but you are quite offensive.
Huh? I answered your question and demonstrated how assuming the universe came uncaused from nothing would in effect destroy the foundations on which science has been established. If you cannot accept that, (or try to rebut it at least instead), then I am afraid it is you who is not willing to open your mind.
Do you think that having the belief of the possibility for things to pop in and out of existence, uncaused, would assist in the validity of an experiment, when an experiment is based on a controlled environment? You cannot control these uncaused "events" so therefore you can never be confident of the results you get are indeed the results YOU get.
As I said you have destroyed science.
I believe Paul says something about not having love and being a clanging cymbal. You have succeeded in turning me away.
Please point to where I have done so
You're going to have to modify your behaviour if you hope to win souls for Christ. Making a counterpoint and then insulting the other person seems to be the MO here. I am glad it brings you joy. Pure poison in my opinion.
I do not see any insults? However I do admit perhaps a gentler hand could have been used. Then again pandering to the crowd is another thing we do not want to do so its a fine line to walk.
I echo the words of Alistair McGrath when he said it's not about wining debates, but winning people to Christ.
I would agree. Perhaps we should keep in mind the atheist / evolutionist ego?
I noticed you did not respond to my counter about strong nuclear forces,
Was that a counter? What was your point then? Because nuclear forces are caused by the atoms they are associated with, (much like how each planet has its own gravitational force). Its simply a product of the existence of the atom. Now this fact has no relevance to the beginning of the universe in that atoms must first exist for there to be a strong nuclear force, with the beginning of the universe there are no atoms existing prior to it.
I had thought you only used it as an analogy, however you have now justified Ron's response in that it was your argument which is one that has no relevance to the topic. Comparing apples to oranges will never get you anywhere.
but oh well. I would be a young earther but it requires too much mental gymnastics.
Now THIS is an insult... Hypocrite much?
You probably have a convoluted explanation for starlight, so I'll spare you the dissertation. I was arguing with an atheist one time and she debated in the same manner as you.
And? Or was this an attempt at another insult?
I'd better get back to my day job as a medicinal chemist. Take care..
And? I better get back to sleep (its 4am) so I can fulfill my day as a research scientist.