Is evolution a religious belief?

Then do what I said. It's quite easy.

 

Then you are suggesting that you are incapable of giving explanation?

 

Wait what? I mean yeah they can make antimatter in a lab but I was simply demonstrating this stuff is more common than you think it it. It's not some possibly-misinterpretted obscure lab result, you can find antimatter in thunderstorms, and they can create it whenever they want using a particle accelerator.

Anti-matter: matter composed of subatomic particles of equal mass but with the opposite charge of those of matter. Found as a result of particle decay and high-energy collisions.

 

What? So you can't possibly do any basic research to learn about antimatter yourself, I have to hand you everything like you're some kind of bored high schooler?

(*)(*)(*)(*)ing Google "antimatter". Not hard, you will find out everything you want. Stop being lazy.

 

Okay so within atomic structures protons, neutrons and electrons - are you claiming protons are now called anti matter?

 

Why should I have to do your leg work. You are supposed to be able to explain those things that you claim you are knowledgeable about. So come on with the explanation. Your innuendos regarding your opinion of me as an individual person are also irrelevant to the discussion.

 

Okay antiprotons are a proton with a negative charge. I got it now.

This anti-matter is created when energy is transformed into matter and produces equal amounts of matter to anti matter, with no exceptions.

Science knows that as a fact from observation, experimentation and repeatability. Is this what you wanted to say?

 

Absolutely, but it goes further than that: MANY religious people ALSO believe in evolution. . .and MANY people who are NOT identifying with any particular organized religion have a deep spirituality that, in some way, may be related to a "GOD," but that "GOD" is not subservient to any man made religion, but to a greater view of an universal, benevolent power.

 

A Proton is matter.

 

Scientists working on the big bang machine in Geneva have done the seemingly impossible: create, capture and release antimatter.

The development could help researchers devise laboratory experiments to learn more about this strange substance, which mostly disappeared from the universe shortly after the Big Bang around 14 billion years ago.


Trapping any form of antimatter is difficult, because as soon as it meets normal matter -- the stuff Earth and everything on it is made out of -- the two annihilate each other in powerful explosions.

In a new study, physicists at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) in Geneva were able to create 38 antihydrogen atoms and preserve each for more than one-tenth of a second. The project was part of the ALPHA (short for Antihydrogen Laser PHysics Apparatus) experiment, an international collaboration that includes physicists from the University of California, Berkeley and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL).

The antihydrogen atoms are composed of a positron (an antimatter electron) orbiting an antiproton nucleus.

"We are getting close to the point at which we can do some classes of experiments on the properties of antihydrogen," said Joel Fajans, a University of California, Berkeley professor of physics, and LBNL faculty scientist. "Since no one has been able to make these types of measurements on antimatter atoms at all, it's a good start."

Antimatter, first predicted by physicist Paul Dirac in 1931, has the opposite charge of normal matter and annihilates completely in a flash of energy upon interaction with normal matter. Antimatter is produced during high-energy particle interactions on Earth and in some decays of radioactive elements.

In 1955, University of California, Berkeley physicists Emilio Segre and Owen Chamberlain created antiprotons in the Bevatron accelerator at the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory (now called Lawrence Berkeley), confirming their existence and earning the scientists the 1959 Nobel Prize in physics.

To create antihydrogen and keep it from immediately annihilating, the ALPHA team cooled antiprotons and compressed them into a matchstick-size cloud. Then the researchers nudged this cloud of cold, compressed antiprotons so it overlapped with a like-size positron cloud, where the two particles mated to form antihydrogen.

All this happened inside a magnetic bottle that traps the antihydrogen atoms. The magnetic trap is a specially configured magnetic field that uses an unusual and expensive superconducting magnet to prevent the antimatter particles from running into the edges of the bottle -- which is made of normal matter and would annihilate with the antimatter on contact.

"For the moment, we keep antihydrogen atoms around for at least 172 milliseconds -- about a sixth of a second -- long enough to make sure we have trapped them," said Jonathan Wurtele, a University of California, Berkeley professor of physics and LBNL faculty scientist.

LINK....http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/11/17/breakthrough-mysterious-antimatter-created-captured/

AboveAlpha

 

So is me typing out a detailed description of anti-matter. The point was that this idiot was denying the existence of anti-matter which is denial of reality. I am not here to educate you about antimatter as I don't care, you are just some person on the internet; you can always look it up yourself.

 

You didn't quote anyone, thus I assumed it was just a general statement.

 

Sorry, but it was beneath the post I was addressing.

 

I don't see it as a denial of reality when you have not shown PROOF of the existence of this alleged 'antimatter'. Where is the PROOF to support your claim? What relevance does antimatter have with 'religion' or 'philosophy'?

 

LOOK IT UP. THERE'S ALL THE PROOF YOU NEED. All you have to do is type it into Google, but you're not going to because you have no interest in educating yourself. Every bit of science you consume is a potential bit of your faith chipped away, so you don't bother.

I know from past experience with you this is going nowhere because you are so dim and self-brainwashed you are intellectually incapable of seeing how irrational your religion is, so I'm not going to bother. There's no hope for you, so you can keep devoting yourself to superstition and be disappointed when you die and there's no heaven to go to -and then think nothing at all, because you won't exist. Ergo, I'm not talking to you anymore, it's utterly useless.

 

Hey....PROVE the sky is blue....or grass is green....Prove that the Gospels are even close to what the original person said as not one single original copy exists.

AboveAlpha

 

There is that old fallacy of assumption.... you are assuming that you know what I need as PROOF. Big error on your part. Try again.

 

With all due respect to SCOTUS, they are hardly the arbiters of religious belief. How not believing in something is equivalent to believing in its defies logic.

there isn't an "evolutionist" on the planet that believes something came from nothing. However there are vast numbers of "evolutionists" who also subscribe to the both the big bang theory and that of quantum mechanics.



MOD EDIT - Rule 3

 

Apparently you might not have heard about "jurisprudential logic". Are you sure you want to maintain that position of judgment against the Highest Court in the United States?

 

Yep. Unless somebody can explain to me how not believing in something is equivalent to believing in it.

I sure as hell am not going to get into the debate between legal formalism and realism, I'll simply say I agree with Oliver Wendel Holmes who said ""The life of the law has not been logic, it has been experience". (proven admirably by Judge Judy and Judge Joe Brown )

 

Why should I even try? Aside from that.. you have completely avoided the issue of you assuming that you know what I need. Why do you make such errors in your thinking? Is it perhaps due to you using logic? Look back at post # 92.

 

Is evolution a religious belief?

Yes, if we are to worship Nature.

 

Your whole arguement relies on equating atheism with evolution which is logically unsuportable and renders your entire arguement null and void.

 

This is so false. Of course cosmic evolutionists believe the big bang was nothing exploding/expanding into all the space, time and matter in the universe. That belief is not based on scientific observation. It is only blind-faith by which they believe that as the explanation for the origin of the universe.

Would you agree that everything from nothing must be a supernatural event considering science has never observed matter or energy being created from nothing?

Since there are so many philosophies surrounding quantum mechanics, why don't you explain what you understand quantum mechanics to be and how it was instrumental in creating all space, time and matter.

Apparently you don't even know what it is you believe.





The ignorance of such a statement is stunning.

 

Easy, it your belief system. It is not based on observation by you, you believe​ what you have been told as true.

belief

3. Something believed or accepted as true, especially a particular tenet or a body of tenets accepted by a group of persons.

Synonyms: belief, credence, credit, faith
These nouns denote mental acceptance of the truth, actuality, or validity of something: a statement unworthy of belief; an idea steadily gaining credence;
expert testimony meriting credit; has no faith in the poorly collected data.

- - - Updated - - -

No it doesn't. Read the complete OP and get a better spell-checker