- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (david @ Oct. 17 2009,18:13) Speaking of Hawking and Einstein, if we step into their world, common sense goes out the window. If 100 years ago, you presented any of their ideas, you would be thought insane.
Hawking and Einstein both demonstrated that we know extremely little about the universe. We are stupid. 100 years from now, we'll have a better idea of just how stupid.
“The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed.”–Albert
I wonder how often stu is “rapt in awe.” hmmm.
100 years from now I predict the human race (what's left of it) will have forgotten almost everything it discovered and learned. Don't take the future for granted.Even if you were right (which I'm pretty sure you won't be) we wouldn't really have a much better idea how stupid, I'm very much with whoever it was who said:
“I do not know what I may appear to the world, but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.” – Isaac Newton I think.
Considering the vast majority of people don't really understand some of the things the human race knows, but can at best parrot the facts?
t8! You’re looking full of cheer in your avatar as ever.
Quote Your God doesn't even live. He is dead/non-existent.
Non-existent of course. More progress t8. Might have to move you up to t9 at this rate.Quote Life came from death.
How would that be possible?Quote Everything came from nothing.
Or that?Quote Somehow the universe and all its logic just happened like magic and there it is.
Logic is a human invention. Therefore, as an extended phenotype it came about by natural selection. Not getting to technical there for you?Quote Rabbits spontaneously come into being when pulled out of a hat.
No, that is creationism you are thinking of.Quote Money can come from nothing.
Money is a concept, not a material thing.Quote Just need to figure out how the first thing came from nothing and go from there.
Well nothing is not a thing from which other things can come, so good luck pondering that one.Quote Wow Stu it is rooly rooly amazing.
Are you drunk under that gas mask?Quote But forgive me if I don't see eye to eye with you.
You can believe what fantasy you want. As long as it does not damage others.Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Oct. 16 2009,15:55) Quote (Stu @ Oct. 10 2009,19:30) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 10 2009,11:35) Quote (Douglas @ Oct. 09 2009,14:21) Quote (TimothyVI @ Oct. 10 2009,05:11) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 09 2009,23:43) Where was science when the world believed it was flat?
I think that the ones who stated otherwise were being repressed or killed by the Christians in charge.Tim
Hmmm, and yet, some people knew the earth wasn't flat before then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EratosthenesSure you're not thinking of Galileo Galilei?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_GalileiActually, if you glance through the latter article it's interesting in that it points out issues with taking all of the Bible entirely literally – to do with the sun rising and the earth not being moveable, etc.
Of course now, we're stuck with not even being able to see the sun as the centre of the universe. On the flipside, it means there's a whole universe out there waiting to be figured out.
Exactly Science is proven and disproven on a daily basis. Funny thing as well as we inch along through life many parts of the bible are being proven accurate.
Like what?Stuart
There is water on the moon, whereas 1 year ago, there wasn't.Piltdown Man was a human ancestor (believed for 40 years).
The Wollemi pine has been extinct for about 150 million years.
Spontaneous generation
Evolution
To name a few.
The question was clarified as “What parts of the bible are being proven accurate?”.I realise that science has a correction mechanism and mendacious scripture is stuck with whether the ancients guessed right or not, but that is not what I was interested in this time.
Stuart
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 17 2009,14:47) Quote (Stu @ Oct. 15 2009,22:48) Let me try that again. So, Is 1:18, your god lives above the earth?
Stuart
Proverbs 15:3 NKJV
“The eyes of the Lord are in every place, keeping watch on the evil and the good.”
I know. Freaky eh?Still, I can tell you as a non-believer it is marvellous not to live in a the self-imposed intellectual prison of an unrelenting supernatural police state. You should try it for yourself: try believing that your non-existent Imaginary Orwellian Telescreen Friend is non-existent and imaginary for a while.
Not that I am prostyletising to you, you understand.
Stuart
Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 12 2009,05:37) Quote (Stu @ Oct. 10 2009,22:38) So we must conclude that the theories of Hawking and Einstein are false, because they do not match experiment or observation. Correct?
No. It was demonstrated in 1919 that gravity bends light, for example.Stuart
Quote (david @ Oct. 17 2009,18:13) Speaking of Hawking and Einstein, if we step into their world, common sense goes out the window. If 100 years ago, you presented any of their ideas, you would be thought insane.
Hawking and Einstein both demonstrated that we know extremely little about the universe. We are stupid. 100 years from now, we'll have a better idea of just how stupid.
“The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed.”–Albert
I wonder how often stu is “rapt in awe.” hmmm.
I assume you are not trying to defend Constitutionalist's hit-and-run on science here.I'm not sure a christian can understand awe of one's place in the universe (to the extent that we can imagine it) because the christian worldview insists that humans who have accepted a human sacrifice have a special place in the cosmos, which is a fantasy story that just does not stack up against what we do know about the nature of the universe.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Oct. 18 2009,21:15) Non-existent of course. More progress t8. Might have to move you up to t9 at this rate.
Let put it another way.Is non-existence, alive or dead?
Or which one is it closest too?
Quote (Stu @ Oct. 18 2009,21:25) Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 17 2009,14:47) Quote (Stu @ Oct. 15 2009,22:48) Let me try that again. So, Is 1:18, your god lives above the earth?
Stuart
Proverbs 15:3 NKJV
“The eyes of the Lord are in every place, keeping watch on the evil and the good.”
I know. Freaky eh?Still, I can tell you as a non-believer it is marvellous not to live in a the self-imposed intellectual prison of an unrelenting supernatural police state. You should try it for yourself: try believing that your non-existent Imaginary Orwellian Telescreen Friend is non-existent and imaginary for a while.
Not that I am prostyletising to you, you understand.
Stuart
He can even see all apes at the same time. Can't hide behind any banana trees. Everything is naked to him.All who practice sin will be ashamed to face the light of God.
Everything will be exposed in the light.The light of God awaits all of us when we depart this place.
Quote (Stu @ Oct. 18 2009,21:15) Quote Life came from death.
How would that be possible?
Agreed. It is rediculous to believe that.Life produces life.
Now go back for an eternity and it explains the eternal life we preach.
Quote Quote (Stu @ Oct. 18 2009,21:15) Quote Rabbits spontaneously come into being when pulled out of a hat.
No, that is creationism you are thinking of.Stuart
Actually no that is not correct.Rabbits that are pulled out of a hat are actually planned that way. Call it intelligent design if you want. If not, don't call it that rabbits came from nothing. Those that don't believe in God have this as the alternative.
Evolution is more in favour of it just happening and not providing an explanation but assuming that it just happened. It sort of all burst forth and please don't talk about what caused it. We can explain the stages on the way, but we don't want to talk about how non-existence did this.
e.g., Nothing > Bang > Everything
Or perhaps Something > Bang > Everything
I think most evolutionist's believe the first one because the second one has two possibilities; that the something was alive or dead. Of course those odds are way too scary for them. If they choose dead, then from the dead something came alive and everything non-living thing came from that too. Wow. There it is again, magic. If it was alive, then what can I say. They are siding with those who believe in an intelligent creator.
Every way you lose Stu. Face it. Take your head out of the sand pit. Be a man and face reality.
You either believe in foolishness or believe in God. Not sure if you are wise enough to see this though.
We all wait with great anticipation to see if you have figured that out yet.
Quote (t8 @ Oct. 18 2009,22:36) Quote (Stu @ Oct. 18 2009,21:15) Non-existent of course. More progress t8. Might have to move you up to t9 at this rate.
Let put it another way.Is non-existence, alive or dead?
Or which one is it closest too?
You would have to ask yourself that t8.It is not me proposing any Imaginary Friends.
Is your god dead (used to move, respire, show sensitivity, reproduce, grow, excrete, require nutrition and have a cellular structure)
or alive (currently has those same attributes)?
Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Oct. 18 2009,22:44) Quote (Stu @ Oct. 18 2009,21:15) Quote Life came from death.
How would that be possible?
Agreed. It is rediculous to believe that.Life produces life.
Now go back for an eternity and it explains the eternal life we preach.
That last sentence does not make sense. Like believing in paulianity.Putting that to one side, this is your strongest argument for evolution by natural selection yet.
All those new species came from older, slightly different species, as you say from other life. They did not arise by divine breathing into dirt or ribs. They did not arise by Imaginary Friends talking them into existence. Natural history has been one very long series of life begetting imperceptibly different life.
Stuart
t8
Quote Rabbits spontaneously come into being when pulled out of a hat.
Stuu: No, that is creationism you are thinking of.
Quote Actually no that is not correct.
Yes it is. Science provides a comprehensive explanation with few assumptions. Creationism has nothing but lies and magic.Quote Rabbits that are pulled out of a hat are actually planned that way.
Are they? Well that is all my illusions shattered.Quote Call it intelligent design if you want. If not, don't call it that rabbits came from nothing. Those that don't believe in God have this as the alternative.
If it was not magic, you would not call it pulling rabbits out of (an empty) hat. You would call it moving rabbits from a hat to a table, which is not magic. It IS conjuring, which is intentional deception. That must be what your god has done, because Genesis is not what happened.Quote Evolution is more in favour of it just happening and not providing an explanation but assuming that it just happened.
Now be very careful here t8. Evolution claimed WHAT just happened?Quote It sort of all burst forth and please don't talk about what caused it.
No, please DO talk about what caused it. Don’t call it evolution though because they are DIFFERENT THINGS. (See below). Whether it is by divine fumbling or a process of space-time expansion giving rise to a gravitational debt of energy and matter, do YOU have a mechanism for it? One that does not just require you to invoke magic again?Quote We can explain the stages on the way, but we don't want to talk about how non-existence did this.
Yes we do. Big bang gives rise to quarks that form atoms that give rise to stars… well you know the story. Or else you still haven’t a clue after two years of me explaining it.Quote e.g., Nothing > Bang > Everything Or perhaps Something > Bang > Everything
No. Just bang gives everything, most of it after some slow, gradual natural processes. Your mockery does not disprove it. It just highlights for some that if it is being mocked by a fundamentalist christian it may be that quite a bit of it is constituted of evidentially-supported, falsifiable, predictive theories, contradicted by no evidence and giving us the best explanations we have. Abiogenesis is obviously an exception to that because it happened once by one of a range of possible means, the actual one having little likelihood of being determined because of the ubiquity of life today.Quote I think most evolutionist's believe the first one because the second one has two possibilities; that the something was alive or dead. Of course those odds are way too scary for them. If they choose dead, then from the dead something came alive and everything non-living thing came from that too. Wow. There it is again, magic. If it was alive, then what can I say. They are siding with those who believe in an intelligent creator.
Well that would be to think a logical fallacy then wouldn’t it. That would be because biological evolution does not attempt to explain the origins of matter.This ‘intelligent creator’ of yours wouldn’t be the one that had no first cause would it? The one believed in by christians who cannot allow that the universe might itself have had no ‘first cause’? That wouldn’t be just a little bit hypocritical would it?
In fact this is a demonstration of how creationists would rather lie or mislead for their god than get their stories straight.
Quote Every way you lose Stu. Face it. Take your head out of the sand pit. Be a man and face reality.
I am! I rather think it is those who must believe in religious fantasy stories at any cost (even breaking one of their own rules to do it) that are struggling to face reality. I don’t mind what reality is very much, although as I have said before if christianity is true than the universe is an ugly one. Your truth might even be the real deal, but it is not looking that likely based on the evidence so far.Quote You either believe in foolishness or believe in God. Not sure if you are wise enough to see this though.
I am an enormous believer in the foolishness described in Ps 14:1. It is one of the best demonstrations of how utterly ludicrous the Judeo-christian mythology is.Quote Edited by t8 on Oct. 19 2009,21:17
Why? Did you find something wrong in what you typed the first time?How could that be?
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Oct. 20 2009,00:43) Why? Did you find something wrong in what you typed the first time?
Yeah.Changed “to” to “too” and a couple of other grammatical things, (if I remember rightly).
Stu, I can't be bothered going tit for tat.
But I believe that everything came from something and that something was God.
Your only alternatives are that everything came from nothing or that everything came from something that wasn't alive.
a) God
b) Something
c) NothingOn the outset with no other information but these 3 options, I have a one third chance of being right mathematically speaking. You have a two-thirds chance if you hold to the other 2 alternatives.
Now consider the following:
The option “Something” has 2 possibilities. The something could be alive a quality that was produced later, or it might not be in which case life came later from a mixing of some older qualities.
So the “Something” option actually sways 50% my way and 50% your way with no other considerations added.
So now the total options are 50% my view and 50% your view.
My views fit as God creating everything or something living creating everything.
Your view is that nothing produced everything or that something non-living produced everything.OK lets continue. If we apply the fact that offspring or attributes of offspring/product, (whether living or not) is often contained within the cause then your options start to diminish. Couple that with the fact that intelligence has an astronomically better chance of making sophisticated systems than the non-living and your options diminish considerably. Finally if you think that nothing can actually produce something, then you are wrong. Nothing that produces something must have been something all a long.
So given the last piece of logic, we can eliminate the 'nothing produced everything' option.
This means we have 2 contenders of which the second one has 2 options. So lets break up the second one into 2 separate contenders.
We now have:
a) God/Creator
b) Something alive
c) Something not living.Now as you can plainly see, statistically speaking I now have a two thirds majority. You have a one third chance of being right.
Now if we take your 33.33% bet which is that something non-aware/living produced all things, then it seems absurd given what I have pointed out earlier in this post.
For these reasons and others, I believe that which was written thousands of years ago, namely “the fool has said in his heart there is no God” is correct. In spite of logic, you still consider belief in God to be foolish.
Perhaps you are unable to grasp the situation you are facing Stu. In that case, I would like to recite a little poem that might help you decide what to do next.
“It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.”
What more can I say? This is where you ended up.
BTW, rabbits that are pulled out of hats are part of a planned act.
The universe that came into being is also part of a planned act.
Things don't come out of nothing. Magic isn't really real in that sense Stu.
Quote (t8 @ Oct. 20 2009,11:30) BTW, rabbits that are pulled out of hats are part of a planned act. The universe that came into being is also part of a planned act.
Things don't come out of nothing. Magic isn't really real in that sense Stu.
Well it is all pretty hypothetical really isn't it. There should be no problem at all for anyone to say that christianity follows just another mythological set of views about the universe that are no truer than any other mythological set of views. There are some mythologies that are less earnestly dull of course.As you have no mechanism and no evidence for the reality of your mythology, it is indistinguishable from magic.
Stuart
t8
Quote Stu, I can't be bothered going tit for tat.
Looks like you have overcome your reluctance below though.Quote But I believe that everything came from something and that something was God.
I realise that. Of course you cannot tell anyone what that thing you call god is, and it appears to be different to the gods others have in their heads. That alone tells us quite a lot about it.Quote Your only alternatives are that everything came from nothing or that everything came from something that wasn't alive. a) God
b) Something
c) Nothing
No they aren’t, as I have explained ad nauseam. I am not limited to your views of how you thing I see the world.SNIPPED stuff that ignores the fact that there are as many options as the imagination allows. And the only evidence we have is for one that is not on your list.
Quote If we apply the fact that offspring or attributes of offspring/product, (whether living or not) is often contained within the cause then your options start to diminish. Couple that with the fact that intelligence has an astronomically better chance of making sophisticated systems than the non-living and your options diminish considerably.
You are continuing to ignore the infinite regress of cause that you have invented. You cannot calculate the chance of ‘intelligent design’ achieving what you claim because you cannot say what it is that you think intelligence has done, so it is a lie to claim it. Your logic is the fairytale fallacies of creationism and the circular logic of all the ‘great’ apologists. You are just defining the point at which you claim magic happened and then trying to disguise it as a rational argument.Quote For these reasons and others, I believe that which was written thousands of years ago, namely “the fool has said in his heart there is no God” is correct. In spite of logic, you still consider belief in God to be foolish.
Yes. Christian belief is the zenith (or nadir) of gullibility, a decidedly human philosophy.Quote “It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.”
Yet you persist.Stuart
to all
first of all ,you must understand that in the last days, scoffers will come,scoffing and following their own desires.They will say……2Peter 3-7 also in Rom;1-20……have been seen being understood from what has been made SO NO MAN ARE WITHOUT EXCUSE……Rom 1-28..SINCE THEY DID NOT THINK IT WORTHWHILE TO RETAIN THE KWNOLEDGE OF GOD HE GIVE THEM OVER TO A DEPRAVED MIND…I think I have asked you before Stu, but if these 3 options are not the only ones, then please let us know the option that is the cause of all that is not something or someone.
I have yet to hear this answer.
If you do not have the answer, then you are not qualified to make a decision on whether God exists or not because you simply do not have a clue.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
