'Who created God' is an Illogical Question!

[Kiranga]

Kwahiyo hiyo filimbi haipo kwa sababu umeitunga wewe?basi sawa hilo tumemalizana.

Haya tuendelee kwenye contradiction.

Kwenye contradiction, umekubali huyo Mungu kama alivyokuwa presented na kutupa contradiction hayupo?

 

[Griseofulvin]

 

[always am a Winner]

Huu mzozo hautaisha.

 

[UHURU JR]

Kwenye contradiction, umekubali huyo Mungu kama alivyokuwa presented na kutupa contradiction hayupo?

Hapana sijakubali na ndiyo maana nataka unithibitishie.

 

[Kiranga]

Hapana sijakubali na ndiyo maana nataka unithibitishie.

Unafahamu kwamba kwa kutokubali na kutaka uthibitishiwe unakataa contradiction?

 

[Kiranga]

Currently watching "The Story of God" a National Geographic documentary narrated by Morgan Freeman.

Just to gain from a contrary, educated perspective.

Do any of the believers here read and explore beyond their beliefs?

The Story of God with Morgan Freeman

 

[descarte]

Anyway,

No I think evolution is fact and you claim it to be a theory.
Let us start from that stance, Which reasons do you have to contend that evolution is a theory?

i

No I think evolution is fact and you claim it to be a theory.
Let us start from that stance, Which reasons do you have to contend that evolution is a theory?[/QUOTE



Tuanze na definitions
Quoted from somewhere
"In the scientific world, facts (or scientific facts) are what one can readily observe. It can pertain to any objective and real phenomenon may it be the falling of the ball after being thrown upwards or other simple observable occurrences. In this regard, the fact is that the ball will fall. More so, if this test is being done repeatedly under a controlled environment that cancels all unnecessary variables the phenomenon would have become a very obvious and undeniable fact. It is considered a fact because it will remain as true even after several centuries unless there is a more rigid and precise way of measuring a certain phenomenon.

On the contrary, theories in science are likened to the explanations to what has been observed. It is relatively greater in weight to what a hypothesis is."

Is Evolution readily observable? No. Hamna mtu ambaye aliweza kuobserve a chimpanzee change into a human being.
Haijawahi kuwa tested and proven kwamba ukimweka nyani hapo baada ya miaka kadhaa vizazi vijavyo watakuwa binadamu. Haiwezi kuwa proven by observation.
Evolution is a theory trying to explain the similarities between man and other organisms structurally and functionally. And just like any theory it has strengths and weakness. And i hate to burst your bubble. It's not a FACT


Unaweza kuobserve kwamba mpira ukirushwa juu unarudi chini, hiyo ni Fact, miaka nenda rudi hata mkirudia mara mia mpira always utarudi chini

Why unarudi chini, ndiyo tunakuwa na gravitational theory. Maelezo ambayo yanaweza yakaelezea fact hiyo[/QUOTE]
Anyway I have been saying this time and time again that Evolution is not a theory rather a fact. When you check on Oxford dictionary there are two

You're wrong
Evolution is not a Fact
It's a THEORY

please kasome tena uweze kutafuta tofauti ya fact na theory

No I think evolution is fact and you claim it to be a theory.
Let us start from that stance, Which reasons do you have to contend that evolution is a

No I think evolution is fact and you claim it to be a theory.
Let us start from that stance, Which reasons do you have to contend that evolution is a theory?

i

No I think evolution is fact and you claim it to be a theory.
Let us start from that stance, Which reasons do you have to contend that evolution is a theory?[/QUOTE



Tuanze na definitions
Quoted from somewhere
"In the scientific world, facts (or scientific facts) are what one can readily observe. It can pertain to any objective and real phenomenon may it be the falling of the ball after being thrown upwards or other simple observable occurrences. In this regard, the fact is that the ball will fall. More so, if this test is being done repeatedly under a controlled environment that cancels all unnecessary variables the phenomenon would have become a very obvious and undeniable fact. It is considered a fact because it will remain as true even after several centuries unless there is a more rigid and precise way of measuring a certain phenomenon.

On the contrary, theories in science are likened to the explanations to what has been observed. It is relatively greater in weight to what a hypothesis is."

Is Evolution readily observable? No. Hamna mtu ambaye aliweza kuobserve a chimpanzee change into a human being.
Haijawahi kuwa tested and proven kwamba ukimweka nyani hapo baada ya miaka kadhaa vizazi vijavyo watakuwa binadamu. Haiwezi kuwa proven by observation.
Evolution is a theory trying to explain the similarities between man and other organisms structurally and functionally. And just like any theory it has strengths and weakness. And i hate to burst your bubble. It's not a FACT


Unaweza kuobserve kwamba mpira ukirushwa juu unarudi chini, hiyo ni Fact, miaka nenda rudi hata mkirudia mara mia mpira always utarudi chini

Why unarudi chini, ndiyo tunakuwa na gravitational theory. Maelezo ambayo yanaweza yakaelezea fact hiyo[/QUOTE]
"WHAT IS A THEORY? WHAT IS A FACT? Only a theory? Let's look at what 'theory' means. The Oxford English Dictionary gives two meanings (actually more, but these are the two that matter here). Theory, Sense 1: A scheme or system of ideas or statements held as an explanation or account of a group of facts or phenomena; a hypothesis that has been confirmed or established by observation or experiment, and is propounded or accepted as accounting for the known facts; a statement of what are held to be the general laws, principles, or causes of something known or observed. Theory, Sense 2: A hypothesis proposed as an explanation; hence, a mere hypothesis, speculation, conjecture; an idea or set of ideas about something; an individual view or notion. Obviously the two meanings are quite different from one another. And the short answer to my question about the theory of evolution is that the scientists are using Sense 1, while the creationists are - perhaps mischievously, perhaps sincerely - opting for Sense 2. A good example of Sense 1 is the Heliocentric Theory of the Solar System, the theory that Earth and the other planets orbit the sun. Evolution fits Sense 1 perfectly. Darwin's theory of evolution is indeed a 'scheme or system of ideas or statements'. It does account for a massive 'group of facts or phenomena'. It is 'a hypothesis that has been confirmed or established by observation or experiment' and, by generally informed consent, it is 'a statement of what are held to be the general laws, principles, or causes of something known or observed'. It is certainly very far from 'a mere hypothesis, speculation, conjecture'. Scientists and creationists are understanding the word 'theory' in two very different senses. Evolution is a theory in the same sense as the heliocentric theory. In neither case should the word 'only' be used, as in 'only a theory'. As for the claim that evolution has never been 'proved', proof is a notion that scientists have been intimidated into mistrusting. Influential philosophers tell us we can't prove anything in science. Mathematicians can prove things - according to one strict view, they are the only people who can - but the best that scientists can do is fail to disprove things while pointing to how hard they tried. Even the undisputed theory that the moon is smaller than the sun cannot, to the satisfaction of a certain kind of philosopher, be proved in the way that, for example, the Pythagorean Theorem can be proved. But massive accretions of evidence support it so strongly that to deny it the status of 'fact' seems ridiculous to all but pedants. The same is true of evolution. Evolution is a fact in the same sense as it is a fact that Paris is in the Northern Hemisphere. Though logic-choppers rule the town,* some theories are beyond sensible doubt, and we call them facts. The more energetically and thoroughly you try to disprove a theory, if it survives the assault, the more closely it approaches what common sense happily calls a fact." by Richard Dwarkin, Evolution: Greatest Thing Shown on Earth.

 

[Laface77]

mungu katokea wapi??? mtachanganyikiwa bure

Kwa nini usianze na wewe umetokea wapi???

 

[UHURU JR]

Unafahamu kwamba kwa kutokubali na kutaka uthibitishiwe unakataa contradiction?

Unajua kinachofanya watu watake uthibitisho kwako ni madai yako ya kwamba hakuna mungu.

 

[Drat]

Can you prove god exists?

Demons do not exist. There are mental health issues which people with neither the training nor the qualifications call demonic possession.

Next time you want a conversation with me reply to my post or tag me. Otherwise I may not see your post.

Kiranga je kuna uchawi na je uchawi unafanya kazi? umewahi kufanya utafiti. Demons unasema hawa exist je watu wanaposikia mahubiri au maneno fulani ya kutoka katika vitabu vitakatifu na wanaweweseka je hilo huwa ni jambo gani?

 

[Kiranga]

Kiranga je kuna uchawi na je uchawi unafanya kazi? umewahi kufanya utafiti. Demons unasema hawa exist je watu wanaposikia mahubiri au maneno fulani ya kutoka katika vitabu vitakatifu na wanaweweseka je hilo huwa ni jambo gani?

Una hakika kwamba wote wamekula?

Una hakika hawana magonjwa?

Unafahamu hypnotism ni nini? Unafahamu kwamba hypnotism imekuwa established scientifically?

 

[Kiranga]

Unajua kinachofanya watu watake uthibitisho kwako ni madai yako ya kwamba hakuna mungu.

Hujajibu nilichokuuliza. Ni sehemu ya uthibitisho.

 

[UHURU JR]

Hujajibu nilichokuuliza. Ni sehemu ya uthibitisho.

Kipi ambacho sijajibu?

 

[Kiranga]

Kipi ambacho sijajibu?

Post # 1765

 

[UHURU JR]

Post # 1765

Nimerudia kusoma hiyo post lakini bado sijaona ambacho sijajibu,ninachokitaka ni uthibitisho wa madai yako ya kuwa hakuna mungu na si kuna contradiction au hakuna maana haifanyi kuwepo au kutokuwepo kwa mungu.

 

[Kiranga]

Nimerudia kusoma hiyo post lakini bado sijaona ambacho sijajibu,ninachokitaka ni uthibitisho wa madai yako ya kuwa hakuna mungu na si kuna contradiction au hakuna maana haifanyi kuwepo au kutokuwepo kwa mungu.

Kwa hiyo unakataa umuhimu wa contradiction katika kuonesha kitu hakipo kwa sababu kina contradiction?

 

[UHURU JR]

Kwa hiyo unakataa umuhimu wa contradiction katika kuonesha kitu hakipo kwa sababu kina contradiction?

Ndiyo.

 

[Kiranga]

Ndiyo.

Basi huna hata msingi wa kutenganisha nini unaamini na nini huamini.

 

[UHURU JR]

Basi huna hata msingi wa kutenganisha nini unaamini na nini huamini.

Huo uthibitisho upo au haupo?

 

[Kiranga]

Huo uthibitisho upo au haupo?

Kwako wewe, katika dunia ambayo contradiction haina umuhimu, hakuna tofauti kati ya "upo" na "haupo".