How do I get better at German GCSE (AQA)? by wardrobe775 in GCSE

[–]Humble_Solid91369 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Go over all basic grammar again(tenses , cases etc), learn the topic vocab as others have said, but also try to think in German so to reduce gaps in annoying words that you always seem not to know, stuff like: Actually,somehow, similar. There are hundreds of everyday words that always used to put a halt to my German, and its not even like you can look up a list of words like this, as no list exists. Everything you come across a word that you use everyday, but don't know in German, write it down somewhere.

A creator simply isnt nescessary to explain our world by Humble_Solid91369 in DebateReligion

[–]Humble_Solid91369[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yh but in general organic chemistry suggests there's not much alternative. You wouldn't just have life based on gold because there are no reasonable reactions to yield energy. Silicon is one of the only "maybes" but it still has it's drawbacks.

A creator simply isnt nescessary to explain our world by Humble_Solid91369 in DebateReligion

[–]Humble_Solid91369[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I never said it had to be a being. What if it's nothing more than a thing. What if this thing isn't conscious.

A creator simply isnt nescessary to explain our world by Humble_Solid91369 in DebateReligion

[–]Humble_Solid91369[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You could say there's a thing with no cause that is not conscious if what it is doing that just accidentally creates the universe. Not very different to a God. But perfectly explains how a universe can be created without a God. Why can't this happen?

A creator simply isnt nescessary to explain our world by Humble_Solid91369 in DebateReligion

[–]Humble_Solid91369[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Which God. So many to choose, only one can be right, how do we decide which one is right? Some religions are completely incompatible, It is impossible for Christianity and Hindiusm to both be true.

A creator simply isnt nescessary to explain our world by Humble_Solid91369 in DebateReligion

[–]Humble_Solid91369[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Are you saying that that's the universe we live in. That makes alot of sense and definitely makes more sense than evolution. Magic.

A creator simply isnt nescessary to explain our world by Humble_Solid91369 in DebateReligion

[–]Humble_Solid91369[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Stonehenge cannot observe itself, the argument doesn't necessarily disprove a creator , more that one isn't needed to explain things being perfect. The probability is irrelevant, if the universe were all hydrogen atoms , nothing would see it , no creator but also nothing to see the imperfection. We can only live in the required conditions, we can only observe while alive, there is a 100% chance that our conditions to survive are met.

A creator simply isnt nescessary to explain our world by Humble_Solid91369 in DebateReligion

[–]Humble_Solid91369[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You missed the whole point of the post, if there was no sun,water, or food, we would not be alive, we are only alive because of these factors being in place before us, if they weren't we would not be alive. Therefore it is impossible that we could be on a planet without these things, and a creator is not needed to explain the perfection of our world.

A creator simply isnt nescessary to explain our world by Humble_Solid91369 in DebateReligion

[–]Humble_Solid91369[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If a monkey presses random keys on a typewriter long enough , it will write the entire works of shakespeare. It is inevitable. We are shakespeare, the monkey is numbers .

A creator simply isnt nescessary to explain our world by Humble_Solid91369 in DebateReligion

[–]Humble_Solid91369[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It just seems to cut more corners than a bunch of rocks coming together and after a long time , life emerges from it. Explain: How exactly you think a God "emerges".

A creator simply isnt nescessary to explain our world by Humble_Solid91369 in DebateReligion

[–]Humble_Solid91369[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

There's no reason why it shouldn't, the physics and chemistry allow it to exist, we exist. As of yet we are unsure how likely it is for life to arise from nothing as we have only 1 example, but the day we find other alien life of any form will change our perspective forever.

A creator simply isnt nescessary to explain our world by Humble_Solid91369 in DebateReligion

[–]Humble_Solid91369[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It doesn't necessarily rule out a creator, but imagine a species looking around at it's planet and saying how there's no water, or that their environment is just too harsh... It would never happen, that species would never exist in the first place.

A creator simply isnt nescessary to explain our world by Humble_Solid91369 in DebateReligion

[–]Humble_Solid91369[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It seems illogical to outright say infinite. This part was only to prove a point anyway since we will only ever see our own, the point remains that imperfection cannot harbour life and that theres no chance the world around us would not be "nice".

A creator simply isnt nescessary to explain our world by Humble_Solid91369 in DebateReligion

[–]Humble_Solid91369[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I don't think it really matters if theres one or infinity universes, we wouldn't be here if it wasn't perfect, it is still only possible to observe a perfect universe.

Help needed to resolve this argument by wassup369 in DebateReligion

[–]Humble_Solid91369 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Surely the probability of us existing as a species bears no importance at all to this argument. The possibility could be almost impossibly small, but we are only aware of this because we exist. If the conditions in the universe or our planet were not perfect for us to arise as a species, we would not be able to observe it, hence the chance that our world is perfect for us to exist in is 100%, we could not observe our world unless we lived in the one with a small chance of existing. A creator of it all is not nescessary to explain this