@peter jeffrey cobb,
peter jeffrey cobb wrote:Aha there we go. Yes religios.
Yeah and you know what is even more funny. Is that you refuse to acknowledge the core of the problem. Religions wouldn't exist without the concept of god in the first place. So the core of the problem ie. "god" is what is wrong. Uproot that base and religion wouldn't even exist. So you would solve the problem of religion by realizing that the concept of god itself is a just made up human idea.
peter jeffrey cobb wrote:
Hmm I wonder what would be able to Unite 2 billion people...... Any suggestions?
Well I know it wouldn't be religion or the concept of god. That part is certain because most wars are religiously motivated at their core to begin with. So the solution isn't more god or more religion.
peter jeffrey cobb wrote:
Ok so what youre telling me is that the earth will be habital for ever and that population will quit growing right?
Nope the earth won't be habitable for ever. Never said that it would be. The population will more than likely grow endlessly because humans don't like to place caps on their breeding practices. Another thing that religion attempts to do but it goes about it all wrong. But what does this have to do with anything we are discussing? Even if we were to throw billions of dollars at trying to develop technology to leave the planet and find another one that would support human life it doesn't mean that it would work or that we should even do so. So what is your point?
peter jeffrey cobb wrote:
If joe the nut was able to get a nuke outside our earth and blow it. Well ok 2 months later tell me...... What would in your best guess What would society and technological advances be like with no computers lights transportation banking system?
I think if anything like that were to happen, "joe the nut" would be a religious nutcase. Probably motivated by some religious propaganda like always to "cleanse" the people of their "wickedness". But regardless your question is meaningless because you are implying that people should forgo technological advances for some type of primitive unity? Really? If I am not mistaken your so called primitive life style was actually far worse than what we currently have. So yeah I would much rather have technology than some primitive ignorance. Is technology delicate, sure, but I never said it wasn't.
peter jeffrey cobb wrote:
Ohh and im still waitng for the name you gave to the mass of wich evreything in this Universe came from....
You are the only one who needs to call it something. I have no problem leaving it as it is. You are the one wanting to call it god, but we don't even know if the big bang was the only big bang. We know very little to nothing about it. Yet you want to call it god, but where you get your reasoning for this is completely beyond anything that is rational or reasonable. You can just make things up because they make you feel good.
I personally don't adopt the singular big bang theory anyways. I have no problem seeing it as a multiple event. But that doesn't support your concept or idea either so I doubt you would acknowledge that as being a possibility. The reality is more than likely that gods do not exist. If there is one that does then it should know what I require to acknowledge it's existence. If that is not good enough for it then it is not good enough for me. If I am the one that requires bending on that, then what good is it? If it can't do this simple thing than it is not even worthy of being acknowledge. What ever happens because of that, is considered my own ignorance. If I get punished for being ignorant than if there is such a being who would punish me for my ignorance, then by all means that being is not even worthy of being called a god, let a lone being worshiped for behaving that way. So long story shortened, I am still waiting.