And I further state that we don't exist. For how could we if the primordial soup from whence we supposedly came didn't exist? Or even the mass of material on which the soup rested, or the heat from the sun which hadn't yet appeared in the sky? To say there is no God means it was up to some non-God entity to create the environment to spawn life. Who would this entity be, and why not just call them a God? Please tell me how your logic explains this? I say that creation itself proves a creator exists.
dd, WE "exist", we have good proof of that. "God" does not exist, we have NO credible proof for his existence. "I think, therefore I am" If there is a CREATOR, I would have to ask...."Who or what created Him?" (ad infinitum) Nope, sorry, probability of a God is slim to none. We must remain rational.
well i hope you all are happy now......i went long HD @ 36.30. 10 seconds later the specialist gapped it down to 35.00..... i think someone forgot to tell the specialist to be patriotic!!!!! it took me the rest of the day to make up most of my losses. anyway, i guess it's a small price to pay considering.
Bucky Lee "We must remain rational." Have you ever heard of quantum physics??? If not, get into it just a little bit and try to stay rational!!
Bucky Lee, The only thing your logic proves, is that you cannot PROVE the existence or non-existence of God. With that realization, I would much rather take Pascal's wager than deny the existence of God. This conversation should end, as it will go on forever. (It also really has nothing to do with trading, and should probably be removed from this board) Neither side is provable, because BOTH SIDES are promoting a form of religion, one side is just not aware of it.