:-)

lol< I forgot to state the following at the end:
Charlie do you disagree to anything I have said, or do you agree to it all?
best regards,
Stranger

Hi Ibn Alsunnah

We need to short down the messages. Both you and me. Let's just agree that we don't agree on your talk of cause and event and what can and what can not be eternal. This is for me a bit playing with words and not with the reality. You don't think so. I hope you have a better evidence than that. 0

#I am not a biologist, but i did have biology as a subject in the school, the high school and the university. Not as the main subject, but still enough to learn a bit about evolution. I am very interested in nature and I study wildlife very seriously, but no need to go deeper into that now. So if you say I don't know much about evolution, you obviously know more. Your latest message does not convince me much about that. I am however aware of the fact that I used the word "evolution" in another way than biological evolution. I used it also in evolution of the space itself. I am sorry if this brought the confusion, but the word itself means something like "development". The space did develop since BB. I will avoid using this word in the future for anything else than as evolution of species to not bring more confusion. 0
You talk about hybridization of species. Well, this is not how a pudle was created or any other race of dogs. We don't talk about mixing 2 or more species. We change the species by choosing just 1 species and picking the individuals that have the characteristics we want to benefit. For example if we want a dog with long ears, than we pick dogs with long ears and let them have puppies. Than we choose the puppies who have the longest ears among those and let them have puppies... and so on. The ears will become longer and longer for each generation. It is a small evolution, but this time not picked by natural selection, but by humans. Same we can do with the colors, or behaviors, or whatever you want. It has nothing to do with hybridization. In the end we change the species. If you think evolution is about hybridization, than you really misunderstood everything. On the contrary. Hybridization of two species who stated to become 2 diffrent species would make them become just one species again, if it would continue going on. 0
I say Quran is wrong because it talks about creation of species, not about evolution of species. I don't need to read the whole Quran to understand that there are mistakes. Do you agree that IF something is wrong in Quran, than the book is not written by god? Please answer yes, or no. 0
You want an example of positive mutation created in the lab. I don't know where to start. Beside all subspecies of dogs, cats, birds fishes, horses, cows, we use mutations in agriculture to get better crops etc. I know it is also used in medicine, but this is not my subject. Are the examples above enough? 0
Your final example of how life started I don't understand. You talk about moving life from one planet to another, not the start of life itself. So it is meaningless of going deeper into that.
It is interesting that you say that evolution does not contradict to Quran. Does this mean that Quran talks about evolution and not about creation of species? Please a short answer at that.

Best regards from Charlie

Welcome back Charlie

Eternity of energy or matter is impossible Charlie, I thought that you understood that.
Let me explain that for the last time.
Matter transformed from one state to another
Lets assume that we are now in state z S0, then matter transformed from state S1 to our state and then from S2 to S1 and so...
So we have an infinite set of states . For our state S0 to exist we need all infinite states to be there and this is impossible.

Who said that everything needs a cause charlie???
What I said that anything which is transformed from one form or another needs a cause to change it.
Everything in our universe changes, so it needs an external factor to change it

You said:

This would be true if I said that God needs the universe to sustain, and I didn't say that at all
And God is not transformable to anything else.

This is based on your very wrong arguments and way of thinking

Sorry to say it Charlie, You are not objective in your thinking

Please Charlie, Don't use your Christian background to judge about my religion. I don't care what other people say and think. Everyone is responsible for the way he thinks and my duty is to show the way and they have the free will to choose whatever they want.

So you like us to call the first cause any name, mickey mouse bla bla bla, But God is impossible.!!!
Do you think this kind of thinking is objective !!!!
Remember that I didn't say God until I started to talk about the properties of the first cause
But once you saw may saying God , then you started to feel that this is very offensive

Charlie, I told you before that I am not ignorant about Evolution but I am not a specialist in the field, I know enough to discredit the theory.
Actually, from you discussions here, I discovered that you don't know enough about evolution. You confuse the term of things changing with time with the technical term of evolution which means mutation+ natural selection
Would you please show me one only one positive mutation that was found or EVEN DESIGNED in the lab??
Well if you mean hybriding species?
This is not evolution, this is known from ancient times, The arabs used to do that all the time for horses.
You stick to something and consider this as the true evolution ppl talk about

Like what?
Have you read the Quran Charlie? I remember you said before that you didn't

Your Benchmark is Evolution: Who says that Evolution is mentioned in his book then you will follow him
We have a rule Charile
That if evolution is really a fact it will not contradict the quran by any means
But what you believe in and I insist on the word believe is that evolution is the only fact we know in life
and this is not true
Charlie Are you a biologist
How much do you know about Biology?

I will give an explaination of how life started and I need your opinion
Some ancient civilization living on planet X was very advanced and they discovered that a certain comet is going to hit their planet at a certain time, so they designed an organic material and sent it through a spacecraft to a planet called earth, which they discovered and studied for sometime, so they selected a type of material which has a 1/10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000
chance of survival and another
1/10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000
of advancing
and what they expected come to be true
Do you think this is logical
please answer
yes
no

Best Regards
Ibn Alsunnah

Hi Hossam

I am looking for the 100% evidence you talk about. If it is even 80% likely I would be very impressed. Go on please. 0

I am sarcastic you say... because I say I did not see god, or see him do anything. Well, if truth is sarcastic, than I am sarcastic. It is true, I did not see, of feel him.... or see him do anything. Honestly. Did you? I admit I did not expect you to answer positive on those questions..... You are right there. 0

About my believes. Here you misunderstand my meaning of word "believe" in this case. For example I believe in evolution because there are so many evidences about it. I believe in what is likely and what is believable. Some things I don't know if I should believe or not, and some I don't believe in because they are so unlikely. Religions are an
example of that. 0

Logical thinking that bottoms in life experience is a good base for my view at the world. Is that answer good enough? I have experience of evolution, but no experience of creation.

Best regards from Charlie

Hi Ibn Alsunnah

Well, eternity is maybe possible I said. I agree. But that means that materialistic, or energetic eternity is possible. So it needs no god to create it. It just evaluated since BB (even before BB, if it is eternal).... both stars, planets, and the life itself. If I understood your previous messages clearly eternity is not possible by logical thinking.... except for god. Am I right? 0

So what I learned so far about god is this:0
We don't know what he looks like
We don't know where he is
We don't know how he can create things, including life
We don't know what he is (except that you claim he is the cause.. but still, what is he?)0
We know that the only way for him to exist, whatever it is, is that he must be eternal. And the eternity is impossible in the logic you talk about, cause everything needs a cause to exist. So the only "evidence" of god is against the logic. Very intresting.... You help me to show that god can not exist, despite all.0

You guys help me to confirm what I presumed from the first day I was here. People believe in god because they want to believe.0

Did you think about this? Every single person who believes in god believes that god loves him and is on his side. Despite all talk of hell for "bad people", nobody think he will end up there. Even people who kill, or steal, think god would understand them. Even me who talks against god and do not believe in him at all can think this way. I can not imagine a loving god could not love me, IF he existed.... Unfortunately for all of us, he is the biggest illusion on earth. Why do all people think like that? Because it is much more pleasant than thinking god would hate me. We humans tend to believe in what we like to believe. 0

You say you know god created the world. Well if you can not give a better explanation of the questions I asked above in this message, than it means nothing. I can also say I know energy and material are eternal. But without explaining how, it does not mean much. I am honest and I say I don't know how it started at the very beginning, while you say you know, but still can not explain how. Words like " god did it" and "i know it" means nothing if you can not give any answer of the questions above. I can say Mickey Mouse did it! Mickey Mouse is eternal! The missing link... 0

#You want me to explain how universe started and how first cell started. 0
The first part I already said I can not explain. Science did not come that far yet. You can not answer it either. If science would accept just the logic you talk aboiut, than we could say universe is eternal. But science needs more evidence than that. So, true, I don't know. Neither do you. 0
About the first cell, i suppose you talk about living cells, there is more known. Even today we have viruses that act like dead material and can exist like that for thousands of years. When coming into a living body they start acting like living creatures and reproduce themselves. Coming out of the body.... they are like dead minerals again. Viruses are the most primitive form of life that we know. It is probably with them life started to evaluate.0
And yes, I can say Quran is wrong (like all other religious books) because there are mistakes in it. How can a wholly book have mistakes? Unfortunately you said you don't know much about evolution.. Well you should start to read about it, cause evolution is not something we believe in just. We know it works even today and we use it's principals to change the species. Did god create the dog pudle? Well you will probably say no, but he started everything. Ok.... If he started everything and you would accept the evolution as a part of creation, than it would be very difficult for me to talk against it. But religions talk just about creation, not about evolution. So Quran is wrong. I will talk more about this later. I talked enough now and unfortunately it looks like I failed to write shortly. No one is perfect...hehehe.... joking just ;-) 0

Best regards from Charlie :-) 0#

Hi again guys

I am back after a nice week on vacation. I see long messages wait for me again and I will try to make my answers short and clear... If i will succeed with that, we will see..... I take it one by one :-) Best regards from Charlie

Dear Charlie,
First I hope you a nice week, And I hope that you will think deeply of our discussion

Secondly I am sorry for my long messages
I try to reply on any point you mention, that is why I always quote your point first, then reply
My reply is that he is eternal
Remember:
So God is Eternal and you cannot have any problem with that
Absolutely no contradiction dear,The universe is an event and God s eternal why this is contradictory
??
No he couldn't

Ok This is the most important thing you said
YOU DON'T KNOW
I know I say God created the universe
If you have a better explanation then please mention it

No Charlie, God is not just a cause he is the first cause. The BB can be a cause but it can never be the first cause because it changes to something else
Did you understand what I mean
?
Examine your reply again
God is not like any of his creation so how do you want me to describe him
!!!!
It is not that I don't know and someone else can know that, This is impossible
The problem that you think that god is some physical object

I replied to that above

When you know how the universe existed
When you know how the first cell formed
Then come and say that the Quran is wrong


Please let me know if there are some other questions that I didn't answer it
Actually I was thinking where is the problem in our discussion, I discovered that it is in this question which you just go an rephrase it every time
:
Which means
God created the universe, Who created God

I answered that previously and my answer followed directly from the arguments
Please think of my arguments and see my reply to these points that you asked about latter

Thanks
Ibn Alsunnah

Hi guys

I will be away from tomorrow 22 of July and maybe a week forward. Hope you have patience to wait for me. I will be looking forward to chat with you again when I am back. 0

Best regards, Charlie

Hello Ibn Alsunnah

You write many long messages so forgive me if I sometimes forget to reply some part of it. I try to not miss anything important. But you ask me same questions many times that I already did reply. If you read my messages, than please try to understand them too. Don't blame me for something you are doing yourself. But, ok, I will try to explain again what is wrong with your logic:0
You explain existence of the world with God. He started everything. Evidence: Nothing can appear (or be created, or starter, or whatever you want) without a cause. Fine. But god just appeared, or is eternal, or whatever you want. God just exists, without a cause. You explain your event (the world) with a cause that is not possible using the same logic that you use in the first part of your logic. Don't you see anything contradictory here? 0
Please, don't ask me the same question again, but read what I wrote and think... or try to think. What did Charlie write here? Could he be right? 0

What I mean about your logic that explains nothing is that, even though your problem is pointing at a missing cause in the start of the world, it still does not show the evidence of god. Something else could be the missing cause. That is what I mean by "explains nothing"0
You say god is not just an assumption, but we came to him by logic. This is not true. Remember I let you go on with some presumes, because we were stuck and I wanted to hear the rest of your way of thinking. I tried to follow you and listen to what you say, but I did not see a god there as something else, but a wish, or something that will fill in a missing link. Ok, but if you want to convince me, than you need something better. Is the logic we talked about above your best evidence of god, or can you present something that is more clear? 0

You did not answer many of my simple questions, but you answered something else, or gave answers that shows you don't know much about god. Check this:0
What is god? Your answer is that he is the cause. Yes, but what cause? In your answer god could be anything, even Big Bang itself, or anything else.0

I asked how does he look like? You say he does not look like anything of his creations. I did not ask what does he not look like. I asked what does he look like. Your answer means, you don't know. Better be honest so we can go on. 0

I asked how come he exists? You say he is Eternal. But before we already talked that nothing is eternal. Ok, god is obviously against logical rules, so he is still there and he is eternal. 0

I asked how he create things. Your answer here is very straight and honest. You don't know. Thanks. I don't know either. 0

Where is god? Again you answer where he is not, but can not answer where he is. I did not ask where is god not? I know he is not here, but I wanna know where he is, if so in another dimension, or whatever your answer is. 0

I asked why can we not see or feel him in any way? Your answer is a question of how I want to feel him. Well, in ANY way... True I can not see the electricity, in the wire, but I can feel it if I touch it, or I can use it, or by many other ways. About god... I wanna feel him in any way! Up to you. Just show me some way that is obviously god at work.0

I never said that things that we can not see do not exist! Where did I say that? Where did I even talk that way? Please don't presume things about me and than use that to show me like I am someone who is not thinking with logic. That is not very fair and it just makes the debate long and meaningless. Please read my messages and try to understand what am I talking about. 0

How do I explain existence of universe? Well, I don't. I know universe exists, because I live in it, but how it all started, that is not known as far as I know. Even if we accept BB theory, we talk about development of universe after BB. What exploded, or why it exploded is as far as I know, still a mystery. It is very difficult to prove a negative fact and say it was not god. But as far as there is no evidence that makes it even likely that such a force exists, there is no need to show the opposite either. It is up to religion to show evidence. What we know is that world did not appear as it is, just like that. A long evolution of the universe took part after BB. Universe did not look the same way all the time. Same about life on earth. It took billions of years for it to develop. No religion says anything about evolution of species, but only about creation. This is maybe not an evidence that god does not exist, but it is an evidence that current religions are wrong, so even Quran.0

Don't blame me for asking questions. I have many of them and often people here don't answer them. It is ok. I have enough of them anyway. We are here to ask and to answer. It is not just your privilege to ask and my duty to just answer.0

Best regards from Charlie

Dear Charlie
I am sad that you didn't understand my arguments
Lets discuss every point
What does that mean
?
How this explains nothing
?
What is my logic
?
Do I have a special logic
?
An event can be a cause to another event yes this is true. But it doesn't have to be all the time. Why does it have to
?
This is why I separated between an event and cause and I said that I want to fix definitions but you said this is complicated !!!!

!!!!
God is not an unknown factor as you say. We arrived to his existence by logic. So God is not just an assumption

It seems that you didn't understand any of my answers Charlie

The Creator, The first cause ( up to this point)

Doesn't Resemble any of his Creation

He is the first or Eternal as you can say

Based on logic, He can create from nothing
But the mechanism is not known

He is not in space or time, because he is the creator if space and time

How do you want to feel him
?
I told you that the First cause is different from any of the creations
No access to him except with our intellect
and then the guidance

Charlie
Two points
WE DON'T VISUALIZE GOD THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE
Explain to me how do the 11 dimensions of string theory looks like
?
Explain to me how does energy look like
?
Not everything can be visualized
But you want to visualize God, You assume he is a human being sitting in the sky and throwing the rain and blowing with his mouth to generate the wind.
God is not like that
The other point: if you are not satisfied with my logic so please point exactly to a point where my logic is wrong
I mean say I don't accept that result given this premise
Don't just say you put many more questions
This is not an argument
Even in science, questions arise once you discover something new. This doesn't mean that what was discovered is wrong
!!!!

The second point is
How do you then explain the existence of our universe
?

So please answer these two question

I guess we are at a point where I gave my arguments and you should examine them carefully and refute them if you can
Don't refute them by raising more questions related to other points like what you said
Refute the logic itself
You have 3 options for the universe to come into existence
1- Came with no cause
2- Eternal
3- Came with a cause
You mentioned that option 3 is the correct one
then I asked you about the set of causes and we agreed that they should be finite
finiteness means there is a First Cause
and we discussed what can be deduced directly from that and we found some properties of the first cause
If you see something wrong with this logical derivation please say exactly what that is
But if you just keep saying this raises more questions, then this is not an answer as I told you before

Best Regards

Good news : God’s existence is now known

Hi Ibn Alsunnah

No matter what you say and what you call event and what you call cause, this explains nothing. The question is too complicated to be explained with your logic. Even an event is a cause and even a cause is an event. God is here just an unknown factor that is supposed to explain the world but explains nothing, just giving us more difficult questions. Can you answer me the questions: 0
What is god?0
How does he look like? 0
How come he exists? 0
How can he create things? 0
Where is he? 0
Why can we not see him or feel him in any other way?0

Best regards from Charlie

Hi Hossam

I read my previous message again, because you find it agressive and sarcastic. I wanted to see... did I really write like that. But I can't see it that way. Maybe you feel my arguments quite convincing and true and therefore you feel i am agressive. Feel free to read it again and tell me what is wrong in my way of thinking?0
But back to your message anfd the question: 0
Do you only believe in what is experimental and disbelieve any other kind of evidences? 0
I do believe in things that can be shown in other way than by experiment. I even believe in many things that there is no evidence about, if they are likely. I believe for example that there is life even on other planets in universe (some kind of life) even thought we don't know. But it is quite likely because there are so many different worlds and life seems to be very adaptive. It appeared on earth, so why not somewhere else? But I don't believe in things that has no other sign of being likely, but people wanting them to be true. Believing is nice, but believing does not make things become true.0

Best regards, Charlie