Frizby

If we discovered that science was wrong regarding the earth and the space agencies fabricated their achievements, would this be proof of Creation and God?..

If we all applied what was sang in one of these songs, which ones view would have the most positive impact for the world?..

where nothing else existed?..

Would the largest be something the size of the Sun that existed entirely on its own in empty space?..

Or would the smallest be something the size of an atom that existed entirely on its own in empty space?..

The reason I ask this is because if there is nothing else in existence to measure something against whether big or small in an entirety of empty space can the size of the object be determined?..

Therefore is the size subjective and can we not really determine the size of say the point that the big bang originated from when it supposedly happened when nothing else around it existed..

Is the size only added for effect so we can imagine something coming into existence from nothing?..

In my opinion only an eternal existence can be the key to our origins and not a big bang..

If you could actually read any ones mind anytime you want to would it be a blessing or a burden?..

the Christian God, all the other gods and religions of the world to the western atheists are an after thought meaning the western atheists main target is the Christian..

What I would like to know is do eastern atheists feel the same way towards the gods of their cultures and are they not too fussed over Christians as western atheists are..

Like for instance are there atheist Indians on religion and spiritual forums having arguments with Hindus saying there are no gods with elephant heads and no gods with three, four or eight sets of arms, whilst they look at Christianity as an after thought..

And how would they fair in a debate against each other?..

Could the Chimps over a long period of time eventually be bread to look totally different to how they look now?..

And could we also choose the preferred traits of their mannerisms, physicality's and capabilities that were more humanistic to domesticate the chimps in a way to make them seem more closer to humans than they already seem?..

And if we cant do this why cant we?..

And if we can do this why haven't we?..

At the end of the day we still have wolves and now we have poodles too and all the other breeds that do not resemble wolves..

So why have we not attempted this with apes, or is it that we cant do this or just that we think its inhumane to do this to apes but not inhumane to do it to wolves..

Whether you are atheistic or theistic how would you explain to another what it is that you believe if you were asked to?..

Without using any science research or any religious scripture, all you can use is what we can see in front of us, whether that is nature or the many inventions we see, not the science behind them just the invention..

Many atheists will reel out many science theories at theists, yet a good many of these theories may contradict another when placed side by side if one was being honest..

So what I would like to know is: What are the science theories that are the back bones and fundamentally breaks the supernatural beliefs stance to pieces?..

Which of these science theories do atheists feel strengthens their atheistic view and supports the naturalistic claim and which science claim do they have no faith in because its merely a belief too?..

When someone believes in something is it because they have no factual evidence?..

Can one still believe something that is proved to be factual of..

Is belief in anything whether that be God or the love of another only dependent on the lack of ones evidence or knowledge?..