:-)

[أحمد فتحي الموحد]

mr. charlie you see how the DNA claim the existence of GOD, i well tell you and you hnow it before me i think so, the DNA is a code and what we have here? the most delicate information about the personality, the hear skin color, and more more information loaded in this tiny chain, how could the coinsidense make that!! i cn't believe it... just the word randoom broke the whol harmony in the DNA, and how could somthing been making by coinsidense keep his stability after millions years, i think his fate is the demise... bot the evolution and developement



ahmed

[Charlie1965]

Hi Ibn Alsunnah
Everything that happens is caused by something, and it causes something. Nothing can exist independent from the world around and nothing can exist without any rules of how it can behave and how it will behave. This is basic in my way of looking at the world and I will start there when I try to give you my picture. But I will be kind enough to not interrupt you with that now. It would just confuse the debate more and it is not something I want. Best regards From Charlie

[Charlie1965]

Hi Ahmed,
Despite what you think, there is a randomness in DNA that works on every living creature that is being born. A good evidence for that is this: If you have , let us say 4 children with same wife, none of them will have same genes to the other 3. The only exception is twins that grew from the same egg of the female. This randomness is what natural selection works with. If there was no randomness, than children of same parents would all have same genes. Thanks for reminding me of this example. Best regards from Charlie

[ابن السنة]

Hi Ibn Alsunnah
Everything that happens is caused by something, and it causes something. Nothing can exist independent from the world around and nothing can exist without any rules of how it can behave and how it will behave. This is basic in my way of looking at the world and I will start there when I try to give you my picture. But I will be kind enough to not interrupt you with that now. It would just confuse the debate more and it is not something I want. Best regards From Charlie

Dear Charlie,
I didn't mean the world we see right now, there is no doubt that everything around us has a reason. This is consistent with the islamic view actually if things came with no reason then this is completely aganist islam.

My question is about the chain of causes which cause the universe to exist
Can this chain be infinite in length
Just start by saying If our universe exist then its cause C1 should exist, and for C1 and hence our universe to exist then C2 should exist,...and so

Can we go like this forever
?

[أحمد فتحي الموحد]

and i know that claim, but you talking about complete DNA (father and mother) given their Properties to their children , and this is normal (complete DNA) but, theres a big point here, even with therandoomnes that you talking about, we haven't never heard about correspendense of 2 DNA between two humans, even if they are twins... still with randoomness and coincidense,
every human has his personal propreties and this dna and evn with randoomnes and coinsidence in what you believe we can't see that correspendense...

let me ask you do you believe that birds are the descent of dinosaurs?

ahmed

[Charlie1965]

Hi Ibn Alsunnah,
Probably we can go on forever, even beyond Big Bang. But the problem is that we don't know if there was something before Big Bang. Probably yes, but a huge explosion like this erased everything and all the evidences that we possibly could see so far. This stops us asking further. We simply can not know the answer and there it stops than. o
Best regards from Charlie

[أحمد فتحي الموحد]

excuse me charlie iam alittle tired and sick, so excuse me this is all for today, tomorrow we will continue ok, i have works to do

ahmed

[Charlie1965]

Hi Ahmed,

What do you mean by correspondence of genes between 2 humans? I did not understand that. Could you ask in some other way? o
About the birds and dinosaurs. Well, the science says so and there is no reason for me to doubt that the birds origin from dinosaurs. But to make it clear to you, we are not talking about Tyrannosaurus rex being transformed into a sparrow, or something like that. Dinosaurs existed in many sizes, some a lot smaller than ourselves. Recent foundings show that most of the small dinosaurs (and even some bigger) had actually feathers, just like the famous Arheopteryx, that has been considered as a link between dinosaurs and birds. And even though Tyrannosaurus rex probably does not have any "grand grandchildren" on earth today some of his relatives obviously have. If we look at its bones they are almost a perfect copy of bones that we have in a ordinary simple hen (Chicken). o Obviously they have same origins. o
Best regards from Charlie

[ابن السنة]

Hi Ibn Alsunnah

Hi Charlie

Probably we can go on forever

No We cannot. This is impossible. If we go then forever then we wouldn't exist in the first place but since we are here and talking now so we exist
In another word
For my universe to exist then its cause should exist. But t cause C1 need another cause C2 to exist but wait C2 needs C3 and so
so if we go to C1000 and say it should exist so that c999 exists and to C998 to exist and so until C1 exists and then our universe

So as you see our existence will never be satisfied

But the problem is that we don't know if there was something before Big Bang. Probably yes, but a huge explosion like this erased everything and all the evidences that we possibly could see so far.

Not probably yes but absolutely yes
why?
because every "thing" in our universe cannot sustain by its own
If a "thing" cannot sustain by itself and need some external factors to keep it sustained then it can't exist without its cause
The same with this weired material which existed before the BB. This material itself didn't sustain and the evidence is our universe
As you said the traces of such material may not be available for us to study but that doesn't mean it was not there and we proved based on logic that it was there

This stops us asking further. We simply can not know the answer and there it stops than.

We couldn't know the answer based on natural science basis but that doesn't mean it is not there
Remember that our discussion started based on bare logic and natural science itself is based on such logics
So Natural Science is just a subset of this logic, We reason with it and we explain experiments using this very basic intuitive logical ideas.
But just assuming that since science cannot explain this then it doesn't exist is against the very basic logic


Either you accept what straight forward reasoning gives us or close your eyes

Best Regards Charlie and have a good night

[ابن السنة]

Dear Charlie,

Let me stop and clarify the situation right now.
We started by saying that the only possible answer for the question "How did the universe come to exist?"
was that it was caused by a certain cause. We didn't assume that this cause is God.
Then I started by asking the question about this cause and if it depends on
another cause which cause it to exist.
Lets assume that this chain of cause and effect is infinite and lets reason if this is possible or not
Let me explain this chain of causes in a different and I hope a simpler way:

The chain of infinite causes is equivalent to :
"I will give you a dollar after I gave you a dollar".The result that I will never give a dollar because the condition " after I gave you a dollar" will never be satisfied.

Equivalently:
step Cn to exist then step Cn+1 should exist
and the condition Cn+1 will never be satisfied

Best Regards
Ibn Alsunnah

[أحمد فتحي الموحد]

what i mean by correspendence is having the same chain of dna, mean 2 individiuals having the same order in the chain,

and about the dinosaurs, the scientists have diclined this fantasic claim, how a land walker can evolved to an fliying creature, by speeedy run! is that a claim?! or jumping between trees?... why? to catch flies! is the claim of darwinistes and its a serious claim for them. so, i have a big question here, when dino. started to catch flies, in that period, how flies have evolved their flying engine, before dinosaurs??

moreover, lets imaginary takes that claim seriousely, how can a cold blood creature by a hot blood creature, an how he evolved further instead of scales, and how he evolved the perfect body and having hollow bones to be light weighted?? is to obviously inseane.

and about the Arheopteryx, is perfect bird not a transicional form, is a normal bird, but an extincted bird! he has what every bird in earth need it, actualy he has considred like a transicional form, but after a afew research and dissection the bird has considered like an extincted bird not a transicional form , by comparing his teeth (cuz, like you know he has teeths) and his leegs by his imaginary ancetors he has nothing commun, contrariwise... he has commun propreties with his family group BIRDS.

remeber: (how a FLIE evolved a flying systeme, before dino. do

ahmed

[الاشبيلي]

Thanks for your comments. Well let me reply back.
You say nothing is 100% for sure? If I ask you how sure are you that the earth is a globe? Maybe you can not be 100% sure, but something like... let's say 99,999999% Maybe everyone is lying to you, while the world is in fact flat. Not very likely, but not completely impossible. To not use decimals you would say 100% sure. In the case of God I am more sure than that, but I choose to say 100%. Why so sure? Because the .
whole story is completely unbelievable, but we will have chance to talk more about it later.

ok dear i didn't mean the material expirment maybe u r right there are many thing we can sure 99.999999%

but i'm talk about byond the real life for example could the scientist know exactly how the earth consist

sure , noooooooo

so u say sure there is agod , u talk like who has an evidance that god is not exist

and let my whisper in ur ear

in islam ( god said that the earth is a glope not a flat like holy book

#We will not be alive at the 31st century to see if there are still religions at that time. I doubt actually. I think humans have either destroyed themselves, or they have learned a lot more about life. I don't think there would be place for religion more than as something interesting that people used in the past to explain the world, since their knowledge was so low.

yes i'm with u prophet mohammed (puoh)

said in the day near the doomsday there will not be there any body say oh my god the evil will spread in earth

[الاشبيلي]

Forgot to answer to the question if believe in a soul. Well, if a soul is or mind that will live on after we die, than no. I don't believe in it

but if there is not a soul so we are like a rock

if my computer don't have a a software my computer will not work

the material is the body

the energy is the soul

what enistein said

the energy will not finish but change from state to state

so there is alive after death

with my best regards

ur friend ashbely

[الاشبيلي]

next question

who let me a live

if there is not a perfect mind created me so , why i didn't appear in 1839 ,1765,1678,1543,1456

345 b .c

2066

seven handred years ago

no

after one century

i'm not important

so why i'm exist

if there is not a goal from my live so i hope i didn't exist

if there is not a goal from this live we must day after we born before we pain and suffer before we see the blood and the sad

before we think about the dei

how the nothing know me know my parents know my software know the place and the time that i will come

my mom lost ababy in 6 month after that i was born

ask yourself as i'm if my brother did'nt dei

do you think i will born and exist in this life

???????????????

think in yourself

and sya

[حسام الدين حامد]

Hi Mr. Charlie

"It is difficult to prove a negative fact"! More precisely we say "Refutation of an allegation can't be done before proving it except when we are able to disprove one of its requisites"! In a court you can prove that negative fact that "You were not at the crime scene" by proving that you were elsewhere as you can't be in both places at the same time, and you don't wait until someone gives an "evidence" that you were there to prove your absence!

So, not all negative facts are difficult to prove, and that is why I asked you if you can prove that God doesn't exist. When you said that you are 100% sure that God doesn't exist, I thought you have something new rather than what all atheists count on! You just bet that I can't prove that God exists! Is that how you are 100% sure?! How do you know that nobody did prove that God exists?! Have you read what all believers said and falsified it?! Whatever the case is, you can't be 100% sure of something that you just bet that I can't prove!

Of course, I will proceed to proving that God does exist, but before that I have some more questions to ask!

Back to the son, let's put your answer in a dialogue form:
You: I was there and it is me who put the book!
Your son: I didn't see that.
You " tell him: I put it there".
Your son: I "did not see" you.
You: "of course you did not... you were not in the room".
Then you say "I am sure he would understand that."

Ok I will quote your answer regarding the question of evolution as I said!
Me: God created all species as he told us!
You: I didn't see that.
Me: God tells us that He created them!
You: I "did not see" Him.
Me: of course you did not … you were not there.
I am sure you would understand that!

In fact neither you nor your son are convinced yet! Your son trying to act like you wants an evidence to believe that it is you who brought the book in! We know that you put the book but the question is that how you will prove it to you son! What kind of "evidence" you give him??

I said that you can't prove that independent creation of species is impossible! As you didn't comment, I will suppose that you agree that the presence of God that created the species independently is POSSIBLE! You agree with that?!

Regarding the rest of your reply, I will sum the answer up , trying to avoid another long reply, Yes Quran didn't include evolution and I will show you in the coming replies that we don’t need to believe in evolution! And I mentioned Darwin and his ancestors to say that the founders of evolution themselves didn't see it opposite to the presence of God. I tought you may disagree with them when you said you are 100% sure that God doesn't exist but apparently you agree with them that evolution is opposite to direct independent creation of species not opposite to presence of God. So, when I mentioned Darwin I had no interest in his religious beliefs before death, I really don't care!

But when you say that there is an article that says that Darwin was an atheist till the end, I'm obliged to quote Darwin saying (Authors of the highest eminence seem to be fully satisfied with the view that each species has been independently created. To my mind it accords better with what we know of the laws impressed on matter by the Creator, that the production and extinction of the past and present inhabitants of the world should have been due to secondary causes, like those determining the birth and death of the individual.) "origin of species". If you read the book you will know that Darwin believed in a God. Darwin wasn't an atheist! And he didn't see his theory opposite to the presence of God!

(This also shows that even if Darwin never would have been born, his ideas would see the daylight some day anyway. Can you say the same about Mohammad and the Quran?)
We don't say that Mohammed peace be upon him is a scientist!! He is a prophet and a messenger from Allah! I don't know what is the point in your question!

A logical fallacy called "appeal to authority" describes well an argument that is based on that Oxford university celebrates Darwin's birth! So evolution is "confirmed"!On the other hand, I can "appeal to majority" ,another logical fallacy, and say that religion is confirmed because atheists are such a minority! Both arguments are not true! I hope we just stick to a rational discussion away from weighing the matter by who is "pro" and who is "against"!

Evolution is an abstract term that you use to describe the origin of species, it is not a subject that works and doesn't work. You may say " Surgery is well and the postoperative course is smooth!" but that doesn't mean that there is no "surgeon" behind that! You may say "I did this by chance!" but you can't say that the chance did this! That is why evolution still needs God! And as I said that is why founders of evolution didn't see it opposite to the presence of God unlike modern atheists !

Regarding the eagle and the three-winged bird, my point is still as it is, you assume that because that is what happened, you try to prove the possibilty of extinction of the later and success of the former beause that is what happened. You are giving an explaination but you are not "scientifically sure" that a three –winged bird wouldn't be able to fly, to mate, to have offspring and to survive. I will clarify that point further more in the following replies after you answer my example of the little kid!

To sum that long reply up:
We know that you put the book but the question is that how you will prove it to you son! What kind of "evidence" you give him??

I said that you can't prove that independent creation of species is impossible! As you didn't comment, I will suppose that you agree that the presence of God that created the species independently is POSSIBLE! You agree with that?!

BTW, I can't write more than one reply every two or three days so I am not able to keep up with your conversation with my brothers here!