Why do Atheists Hate Religion?

[BADecker]

Nicely stated. Very good! Now see if you replace The Big Bang Theory (which is also a great show btw) with God and see how the pieces fall exactly the same way.

Scientific laws that, when combined, are proof for the existence of God:
1. Cause and effect;
2. Complex universe;
3. Universal entropy.

3. Universal entropy. - we evolved from simpler lifeforms.  Complex systems can form from less complex systems, or they can form from more complex into less complex.  3rd down.

Dude, with this one I nearly cried on my keyboard!
It's impossible to make him understand! Though it's so easy to see that life forms evolve into things more complex! And so are also stars or planets. Not only life.

It's impossible to make him understand that entropy is linked to order and energy, not to complexity. That those two notions are NOT correlated. 

How dense are you, anyway?

Cause and effect is law. Evolution is barely theory. Law trumps theory, because law is fact while theory is not necessarily fact, and may only be fiction.

Cause and effect is programming. Programming means that greater complexity brought lesser complexity into happening, even if it was through even lesser complexity.

The fact that entropy has to do with order and energy doesn't have anything to do with the fact that entropy is a reduction in complexity.

You need to get back to your studies.

[1713583983]

1713583983

[1713583983]

1713583983

[BADecker]

Nicely stated. Very good! Now see if you replace The Big Bang Theory (which is also a great show btw) with God and see how the pieces fall exactly the same way.

Scientific laws that, when combined, are proof for the existence of God:
1. Cause and effect;
2. Complex universe;
3. Universal entropy.

So what's the cause of God? And what will happen once the universe reach final entropy which means everything is equal?

God is outside of the operation of cause and effect, except where He wants to be within it.

Nobody knows what might happen in the case of 100% entropy. Nobody knows if such a thing could ever exist. It's like absolute zero. We can conceive of the idea of absolute zero, but we have never reached such coldness, and we don't know if anything could actually get there.

Why do you ask me these questions? Go back to school and ask your teachers. Or Google it.

[BADecker]

... And what will happen once the universe reach final entropy which means everything is equal?

My guess is BADecker thinks Jesus and Moses will drop down from heaven and Mohammed will fly down on his white horse and the three will do the Armageddon thing.
My money is Mohammed.  He will chop Moses head off in no time and make Jesus his bitch.

The two will live happily forever, fucking each other five times a day (in the direction of Mecca of course).

Long before entropy will have come close to being complete, Jesus will come with His Heavenly Hosts, send the devil and Mohammad to Hell, and you along with them if you will not turn and accept Jesus as your Savior.

[BADecker]

... And what will happen once the universe reach final entropy which means everything is equal?

My guess is BADecker thinks Jesus and Moses will drop down from heaven and Mohammed will fly down on his white horse and the three will do the Armageddon thing.
My money is Mohammed.  He will chop Moses head off in no time and make Jesus his bitch.

The two will live happily forever, fucking each other five times a day (in the direction of Mecca of course).

Long before entropy will have come close to being complete, Jesus will come with His Heavenly Hosts, send the devil and Mohammad to Hell, and you along with them if you will not turn and accept Jesus as your Savior.

See I was right.  I can read his tiny brain like an open book.

What is really amazing is that somebody as intelligent as you can be so right about me and so wrong about God.

[Lenore]

Nicely stated. Very good! Now see if you replace The Big Bang Theory (which is also a great show btw) with God and see how the pieces fall exactly the same way.

Scientific laws that, when combined, are proof for the existence of God:
1. Cause and effect;
2. Complex universe;
3. Universal entropy.

1. Cause and effect; - you don't have cause for God.  1st down, two to go.
2. Complex universe; - yes it is, so are other universes.  2nd down, one to go.
3. Universal entropy. - we evolved from simpler lifeforms.  Complex systems can form from less complex systems, or they can form from more complex into less complex.  3rd down.

1. God exists outside of the area where cause and affect apply to Him. Cause and effect are creations of His that apply to this universe. They help us to see for a fact that He exists.

2. If there are other universes, they are completely different than ours. If they weren't, they would simply be extensions of ours. If other universes exist, they were created by God, and in their own way lend credence to God in the same way that our complex universe does.

3. Evolution is not fact. Cause and effect says that things were programmed. Therefore, complex things that came from simple things were programmed by Something even more complex than it all. Because of this, complex doesn't really come from simple.

How retarded can you get? Keep on showing us.

1. You are proving that he exist and you are assuming he exist (outside of our universe) and rules of your proof do not apply to him.  Does this make sense to you?

2. You are not getting it. Complexity of OUR universe has no correlation on the existence of God.  You assumed there is a correlation.

3. It is pretty close to a fact.  Physical evidence is overwhelming.  DNA testing makes it practically a fact.
Again, you are injecting God creation into proving that he exists with your 'programming' argument.

You have to start with an assumption that he does not exist, AND then reason based on the evidence that he exist.

Not assume that he exist and look for evidence that he created the world to prove that he exist.  Your efforts are pointless because you already assumed he exists before you even started your 'proof'.

int godExist = false;

if (!godExist) {
  // oh shit he does exist
  // repent, give all your money to church etc.
} else {
  // yeah, I was right, I could not find any evidence for his existence
  // burn the Quran, light it with the bible.
}

The highlighted red above is about right.  Religion like anything else now a days is a business not something to believe in.  The last time i went to church all I could hear was donate donate donate.   Mormons seems to be the worst when it comes to taking money.  Most places they do not even have a church.  They set up in a hotel or something like that and still collect money.  

Religion is a business anymore.  The ones with the worst attitudes are the Caholics.  I just love when they talk about not judging other and the first time someone does something wrong they are the first to judge.  They always seem to be so contradictive.  If anyone wants atheists to believe give them proof.  And I dont mean a book either.  Or artifacts that could have belonged to anyone back in the day.

Know what is funny about alot of this?  There were old inscriptions found on cave walls, writings in some of the first books, clay tablets that had inscriptions on them.  These objects were found all over the world from all different cultures and sometimes thousands of years apart. Do you know what all of they pictured and inscribed about?

Aliens.  They all pictured UFO shaped objects and people will long bodies.  Maybe these are the gods everyone is talking about.  There is more proof that Aliens exist then there is that god exists.  Yet everyone looks to a god that may be something that most people do not believe in.

What if all you Christians found out that it all was a lie?  What would you all do then?  Turn what they call Evil?

[Moloch]

Madeline Albright (former secretary of state) says that there is a special place in hell for women who don't vote for Hillary...

This is the type of shit that pisses me off... Using religion to push crazy bullshit someone pulled out of their ass

[Lenore]

Madeline Albright (former secretary of state) says that there is a special place in hell for women who don't vote for Hillary...

This is the type of shit that pisses me off... Using religion to push crazy bullshit someone pulled out of their ass

I agree with you on this one.   Look at Iowa.  Cruz only won because of religion.  All they could talk about was the Angelic voters.  And he praised god more then any other time knowing that the state can be won by religious voters.

[BADecker]

Nicely stated. Very good! Now see if you replace The Big Bang Theory (which is also a great show btw) with God and see how the pieces fall exactly the same way.

Scientific laws that, when combined, are proof for the existence of God:
1. Cause and effect;
2. Complex universe;
3. Universal entropy.

1. Cause and effect; - you don't have cause for God.  1st down, two to go.
2. Complex universe; - yes it is, so are other universes.  2nd down, one to go.
3. Universal entropy. - we evolved from simpler lifeforms.  Complex systems can form from less complex systems, or they can form from more complex into less complex.  3rd down.

1. God exists outside of the area where cause and affect apply to Him. Cause and effect are creations of His that apply to this universe. They help us to see for a fact that He exists.

2. If there are other universes, they are completely different than ours. If they weren't, they would simply be extensions of ours. If other universes exist, they were created by God, and in their own way lend credence to God in the same way that our complex universe does.

3. Evolution is not fact. Cause and effect says that things were programmed. Therefore, complex things that came from simple things were programmed by Something even more complex than it all. Because of this, complex doesn't really come from simple.

How retarded can you get? Keep on showing us.

1. You are proving that he exist and you are assuming he exist (outside of our universe) and rules of your proof do not apply to him.  Does this make sense to you?

It is true that we do not have much if any proof about the attributes of God. But science has proven His existence to be factual, even if few scientists will admit it.

2. You are not getting it. Complexity of OUR universe has no correlation on the existence of God.  You assumed there is a correlation.

Now you are not getting it. Nowhere in our understanding or knowledge of the things of the universe do we find greater complexity coming from lesser complexity. We might have some ideas that this happens. We are looking hard for this to have happened. But we don't have any proof that it has happened.

A grain of sand is complex in its atomic makeup. A human being is far more complex in his atomic makeup. Thus, a human being could never come from a grain of sand without something even more complex than both making it so. This alone means that evolution is not true, but that God is true. When you add cause and effect to the whole thing, we see that God is true by the cause and effect action that has produced us thousands of years after the beginning.

3. It is pretty close to a fact.  Physical evidence is overwhelming.  DNA testing makes it practically a fact.
Again, you are injecting God creation into proving that he exists with your 'programming' argument.

What are you talking about? Whatever it is that you are talking about, if it is pretty close to fact, it is NOT fact. Only if it is fact is it fact. If DNA testing makes it practically a fact, that means that DNA testing doesn't quite make it fact. This means that whatever it is that you are talking about hasn't been shown to be fact by DNA testing.

Since God has been proven by science, we can see that whatever facts there are come from God.

You have to start with an assumption that he does not exist, AND then reason based on the evidence that he exist.

When you start, you start without science. Then, you start to invent science. You see that your inventing is slightly more complex than if you hadn't invented. Then you realize that the world around you is way more complex than your inventing. Then you realize that God must exist to make the complexity that is way beyond what you can invent. Then you expand your science to the point where even it proves that God exists.

This is the thing that has happened in modern science. Modern scientists, for their own reasons, don't like the idea of God. That's why they are promoting inconclusive theories to be truth. They are hoping that if they can make their inconclusive theroies to be accepted enough, God will simply go away.

Things don't work like that. Scientific law has proven God exists. When more of the theories are proven to be laws, they will prove more things about God. If they don't, they will either remain inconclusive theories, or they will be dropped even as theories.

Not assume that he exist and look for evidence that he created the world to prove that he exist.  Your efforts are pointless because you already assumed he exists before you even started your 'proof'.

int godExist = false;

if (!godExist) {
  // oh shit he does exist
  // repent, give all your money to church etc.
} else {
  // yeah, I was right, I could not find any evidence for his existence
  // burn the Quran, light it with the bible.
}

There is no assumption in the scientific facts/laws that prove God exists. People who understand that God exists might have all kinds of assumptions about His character. But there aren't any assumptions about the fact of His existence. That God exists is fact... not assumption. Sounds to me like you are assuming that God doesn't exist after science has proven that He does exist. You don't make any sense.

[clangtrump]

Not really hate it, it's just there are some practices and attitudes of this guys that are confusing and to no jive with what it should present

[BADecker]

Yes I agree.  God exists.

This makes me very happy.

Now that you understand that God exists, please start formulating some theories that we can use to prove some of His attributes.

[BADecker]

Nicely stated. Very good! Now see if you replace The Big Bang Theory (which is also a great show btw) with God and see how the pieces fall exactly the same way.

Scientific laws that, when combined, are proof for the existence of God:
1. Cause and effect;
2. Complex universe;
3. Universal entropy.

1. Cause and effect; - you don't have cause for God.  1st down, two to go.
2. Complex universe; - yes it is, so are other universes.  2nd down, one to go.
3. Universal entropy. - we evolved from simpler lifeforms.  Complex systems can form from less complex systems, or they can form from more complex into less complex.  3rd down.

1. God exists outside of the area where cause and affect apply to Him. Cause and effect are creations of His that apply to this universe. They help us to see for a fact that He exists.

2. If there are other universes, they are completely different than ours. If they weren't, they would simply be extensions of ours. If other universes exist, they were created by God, and in their own way lend credence to God in the same way that our complex universe does.

3. Evolution is not fact. Cause and effect says that things were programmed. Therefore, complex things that came from simple things were programmed by Something even more complex than it all. Because of this, complex doesn't really come from simple.

How retarded can you get? Keep on showing us.

1. You are proving that he exist and you are assuming he exist (outside of our universe) and rules of your proof do not apply to him.  Does this make sense to you?

2. You are not getting it. Complexity of OUR universe has no correlation on the existence of God.  You assumed there is a correlation.

3. It is pretty close to a fact.  Physical evidence is overwhelming.  DNA testing makes it practically a fact.
Again, you are injecting God creation into proving that he exists with your 'programming' argument.

You have to start with an assumption that he does not exist, AND then reason based on the evidence that he exist.

Not assume that he exist and look for evidence that he created the world to prove that he exist.  Your efforts are pointless because you already assumed he exists before you even started your 'proof'.

int godExist = false;

if (!godExist) {
  // oh shit he does exist
  // repent, give all your money to church etc.
} else {
  // yeah, I was right, I could not find any evidence for his existence
  // burn the Quran, light it with the bible.
}

The highlighted red above is about right.  Religion like anything else now a days is a business not something to believe in.  The last time i went to church all I could hear was donate donate donate.   Mormons seems to be the worst when it comes to taking money.  Most places they do not even have a church.  They set up in a hotel or something like that and still collect money.  

Religion is a business anymore.  The ones with the worst attitudes are the Caholics.  I just love when they talk about not judging other and the first time someone does something wrong they are the first to judge.  They always seem to be so contradictive.  If anyone wants atheists to believe give them proof.  And I dont mean a book either.  Or artifacts that could have belonged to anyone back in the day.

Know what is funny about alot of this?  There were old inscriptions found on cave walls, writings in some of the first books, clay tablets that had inscriptions on them.  These objects were found all over the world from all different cultures and sometimes thousands of years apart. Do you know what all of they pictured and inscribed about?

Aliens.  They all pictured UFO shaped objects and people will long bodies.  Maybe these are the gods everyone is talking about.  There is more proof that Aliens exist then there is that god exists.  Yet everyone looks to a god that may be something that most people do not believe in.

What if all you Christians found out that it all was a lie?  What would you all do then?  Turn what they call Evil?

This is why we Christians are so thankful that God has left proofs about Himself that can be found through modern science. We don't have to worry about God not being true. We can focus on His attributes, and let the false religions, or the money-monger religions, enslave the non-scientific masses.

[craked5]

Nicely stated. Very good! Now see if you replace The Big Bang Theory (which is also a great show btw) with God and see how the pieces fall exactly the same way.

Scientific laws that, when combined, are proof for the existence of God:
1. Cause and effect;
2. Complex universe;
3. Universal entropy.

Again we're coming back to that...
How are those three laws proven for you?
Why those particular aspects of science seem true for you?

Because those laws are proven with less precision than quantum physics right now...

These three laws are and have been proven for me just like they have for you. They are proven by science. And the fact that they have been proven is that they are called laws, not theories.

Quantum anything is theory. This means that it has not been proven. This means that it is not law.

Google it.

That's where you're wrong.

Those laws you're talking about are proven by experiment. The precision of those experiment are roughly at the 14th decimal.
The experiment proving the quantum theory are precise and proving it at something like the 21th decimal. So quantum theory, or quantum law, is proven better than the others!

Checkmate.

[BADecker]

Yes I agree.  God exists.

In your head.

This makes me very happy.

Now that you understand that God exists, please start formulating some theories that we can use to prove some of His attributes.

I will, as soon as you learn how to read and not skip the critical points.

I know, I know. Since you don't even know how to attempt to disprove scientific points and laws scientifically, how could I really expect you to formulate any scientific theories? Silly me. But, of course, I was just teasing.

However, nice to know that you finally understand that God exists, scientifically.

[craked5]

Yes I agree.  God exists.

In your head.

This makes me very happy.

Now that you understand that God exists, please start formulating some theories that we can use to prove some of His attributes.

I will, as soon as you learn how to read and not skip the critical points.

I know, I know. Since you don't even know how to attempt to disprove scientific points and laws scientifically, how could I really expect you to formulate any scientific theories? Silly me. But, of course, I was just teasing.

However, nice to know that you finally understand that God exists, scientifically.

You're talking about science?
You consider the best and most precise theory in the history of mankind as a lesser theory that theories of gravity which were proven wrong already (by wrong I mean not perfectly and exactly right)

[BADecker]

Nicely stated. Very good! Now see if you replace The Big Bang Theory (which is also a great show btw) with God and see how the pieces fall exactly the same way.

Scientific laws that, when combined, are proof for the existence of God:
1. Cause and effect;
2. Complex universe;
3. Universal entropy.

Again we're coming back to that...
How are those three laws proven for you?
Why those particular aspects of science seem true for you?

Because those laws are proven with less precision than quantum physics right now...

These three laws are and have been proven for me just like they have for you. They are proven by science. And the fact that they have been proven is that they are called laws, not theories.

Quantum anything is theory. This means that it has not been proven. This means that it is not law.

Google it.

That's where you're wrong.

Those laws you're talking about are proven by experiment. The precision of those experiment are roughly at the 14th decimal.
The experiment proving the quantum theory are precise and proving it at something like the 21th decimal. So quantum theory, or quantum law, is proven better than the others!

Checkmate.

There is a whole little section that you are missing in this. Quantum, being probability, is always only probability. Probability can be very precise, depending on how much probability a scientist wants to put into it. The interesting thing about probability is, you can prove anything with quantum.

Let's say that you set out to use quantum to prove that evolution is true. You could do it. At the same time, let's say that the scientist in the next room set out to prove that evolution could never happen because of cause and effect. He could do it as well.

Quantum can prove anything, even very precisely. Quantum can even be used to prove the likelihood of evolution to be higher or lower, depending on the way the scientists uses quantum. At the same time, the scientist next door can use quantum to prove various levels of evolution improbability.

Essentially, quantum gives a scientist direction for testing his ideas and theories, and the encouragement to not give up until he has proven that his ideas are true or false... proven through other methods than quantum/probability, since probability alone proves nothing.

[BADecker]

Yes I agree.  God exists.

In your head.

This makes me very happy.

Now that you understand that God exists, please start formulating some theories that we can use to prove some of His attributes.

I will, as soon as you learn how to read and not skip the critical points.

I know, I know. Since you don't even know how to attempt to disprove scientific points and laws scientifically, how could I really expect you to formulate any scientific theories? Silly me. But, of course, I was just teasing.

However, nice to know that you finally understand that God exists, scientifically.

You're talking about science?
You consider the best and most precise theory in the history of mankind as a lesser theory that theories of gravity which were proven wrong already (by wrong I mean not perfectly and exactly right)

I don't necessarily agree with what you are saying that I consider. I really don't want to get into even talking about the strength of this or that theory. The thing that I am really saying is that science law proves God exists.

[craked5]

There is a whole little section that you are missing in this. Quantum, being probability, is always only probability. Probability can be very precise, depending on how much probability a scientist wants to put into it. The interesting thing about probability is, you can prove anything with quantum.

Let's say that you set out to use quantum to prove that evolution is true. You could do it. At the same time, let's say that the scientist in the next room set out to prove that evolution could never happen because of cause and effect. He could do it as well.

Quantum can prove anything, even very precisely. Quantum can even be used to prove the likelihood of evolution to be higher or lower, depending on the way the scientists uses quantum. At the same time, the scientist next door can use quantum to prove various levels of evolution improbability.

Essentially, quantum gives a scientist direction for testing his ideas and theories, and the encouragement to not give up until he has proven that his ideas are true or false... proven through other methods than quantum/probability, since probability alone proves nothing.

DAMN YOU'RE SO IRRITATING!!!!!!!!!!!!

For the last fucking time: Quantum theory is NOT probabilities!
It's a very precise and simple explanation of how the world works!!!

From THIS explanation, we can conclude that any observation on a very tiny little part of our universe (nanoscale) is IMPOSSIBLE because when it gets too small the only thing you can get are probabilities!

Can't you see the difference???

[BADecker]

There is a whole little section that you are missing in this. Quantum, being probability, is always only probability. Probability can be very precise, depending on how much probability a scientist wants to put into it. The interesting thing about probability is, you can prove anything with quantum.

Let's say that you set out to use quantum to prove that evolution is true. You could do it. At the same time, let's say that the scientist in the next room set out to prove that evolution could never happen because of cause and effect. He could do it as well.

Quantum can prove anything, even very precisely. Quantum can even be used to prove the likelihood of evolution to be higher or lower, depending on the way the scientists uses quantum. At the same time, the scientist next door can use quantum to prove various levels of evolution improbability.

Essentially, quantum gives a scientist direction for testing his ideas and theories, and the encouragement to not give up until he has proven that his ideas are true or false... proven through other methods than quantum/probability, since probability alone proves nothing.

DAMN YOU'RE SO IRRITATING!!!!!!!!!!!!

For the last fucking time: Quantum theory is NOT probabilities!
It's a very precise and simple explanation of how the world works!!!

From THIS explanation, we can conclude that any observation on a very tiny little part of our universe (nanoscale) is IMPOSSIBLE because when it gets too small the only thing you can get are probabilities!

Can't you see the difference???

I am not trying to be irritating or to upset you in any way.

The fact that quantum is probability is not my idea. It is the idea of scientists that work with quantum. However, tiny is what quantum is all about. And your explanation of tiny becoming probability is probably correct, except where you say that it is impossible. In fact, this is exactly what quantum is all about... tininess that gets so small that all that is left of it is probability.

But don't take my word for it. Listen to Brian Cox .


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcfQkxwz4Oo.

[craked5]

There is a whole little section that you are missing in this. Quantum, being probability, is always only probability. Probability can be very precise, depending on how much probability a scientist wants to put into it. The interesting thing about probability is, you can prove anything with quantum.

Let's say that you set out to use quantum to prove that evolution is true. You could do it. At the same time, let's say that the scientist in the next room set out to prove that evolution could never happen because of cause and effect. He could do it as well.

Quantum can prove anything, even very precisely. Quantum can even be used to prove the likelihood of evolution to be higher or lower, depending on the way the scientists uses quantum. At the same time, the scientist next door can use quantum to prove various levels of evolution improbability.

Essentially, quantum gives a scientist direction for testing his ideas and theories, and the encouragement to not give up until he has proven that his ideas are true or false... proven through other methods than quantum/probability, since probability alone proves nothing.

DAMN YOU'RE SO IRRITATING!!!!!!!!!!!!

For the last fucking time: Quantum theory is NOT probabilities!
It's a very precise and simple explanation of how the world works!!!

From THIS explanation, we can conclude that any observation on a very tiny little part of our universe (nanoscale) is IMPOSSIBLE because when it gets too small the only thing you can get are probabilities!

Can't you see the difference???

I am not trying to be irritating or to upset you in any way.

The fact that quantum is probability is not my idea. It is the idea of scientists that work with quantum. However, tiny is what quantum is all about. And your explanation of tiny becoming probability is probably correct, except where you say that it is impossible. In fact, this is exactly what quantum is all about... tininess that gets so small that all that is left of it is probability.

But don't take my word for it. Listen to Brian Cox .


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcfQkxwz4Oo.

Yeah sure listen to the 60 seconds of Brian Cox where he can explain correctly for sure!!!
Here is an article summing up the thing correctly. And please next time you try to get a point give a REAL proof, not the only time where a scientist had so little time (60 seconds IS short) he couldn't make the distinction between the theory and the application.

"In 1900, physicist Max Planck presented his quantum theory to the German Physical Society. Planck had sought to discover the reason that radiation from a glowing body changes in color from red, to orange, and, finally, to blue as its temperature rises. He found that by making the assumption that energy existed in individual units in the same way that matter does, rather than just as a constant electromagnetic wave - as had been formerly assumed - and was therefore quantifiable, he could find the answer to his question. The existence of these units became the first assumption of quantum theory."

http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/quantum-theory

[BADecker]

There is a whole little section that you are missing in this. Quantum, being probability, is always only probability. Probability can be very precise, depending on how much probability a scientist wants to put into it. The interesting thing about probability is, you can prove anything with quantum.

Let's say that you set out to use quantum to prove that evolution is true. You could do it. At the same time, let's say that the scientist in the next room set out to prove that evolution could never happen because of cause and effect. He could do it as well.

Quantum can prove anything, even very precisely. Quantum can even be used to prove the likelihood of evolution to be higher or lower, depending on the way the scientists uses quantum. At the same time, the scientist next door can use quantum to prove various levels of evolution improbability.

Essentially, quantum gives a scientist direction for testing his ideas and theories, and the encouragement to not give up until he has proven that his ideas are true or false... proven through other methods than quantum/probability, since probability alone proves nothing.

DAMN YOU'RE SO IRRITATING!!!!!!!!!!!!

For the last fucking time: Quantum theory is NOT probabilities!
It's a very precise and simple explanation of how the world works!!!

From THIS explanation, we can conclude that any observation on a very tiny little part of our universe (nanoscale) is IMPOSSIBLE because when it gets too small the only thing you can get are probabilities!

Can't you see the difference???

I am not trying to be irritating or to upset you in any way.

The fact that quantum is probability is not my idea. It is the idea of scientists that work with quantum. However, tiny is what quantum is all about. And your explanation of tiny becoming probability is probably correct, except where you say that it is impossible. In fact, this is exactly what quantum is all about... tininess that gets so small that all that is left of it is probability.

But don't take my word for it. Listen to Brian Cox .


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcfQkxwz4Oo.

Yeah sure listen to the 60 seconds of Brian Cox where he can explain correctly for sure!!!
Here is an article summing up the thing correctly. And please next time you try to get a point give a REAL proof, not the only time where a scientist had so little time (60 seconds IS short) he couldn't make the distinction between the theory and the application.

"In 1900, physicist Max Planck presented his quantum theory to the German Physical Society. Planck had sought to discover the reason that radiation from a glowing body changes in color from red, to orange, and, finally, to blue as its temperature rises. He found that by making the assumption that energy existed in individual units in the same way that matter does, rather than just as a constant electromagnetic wave - as had been formerly assumed - and was therefore quantifiable, he could find the answer to his question. The existence of these units became the first assumption of quantum theory."

http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/quantum-theory

Okay. I don't work with quantum theory. And I don't want to get into it. But Brian Cox is accepted worldwide. So probably, if you carry what Max Planck was doing to its limit, you would wind up with what Brian Cox is saying.

Notice one thing about this whole quantum area. It is right in the site address you listed above. It is quantum THEORY. When you have one science theory trying to prove another science theory, you are writing a science fiction story. If either of them happened to be a law of science, then you might have something.

Science theory is based on probability. Quantum theory is, therefore, the theory of theories. Probability fits this description to a tee.