| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Why is religion the quintessential forum topic? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: May 21 2008, 03:27 PM (2,765 Views) | |
| Larry | May 25 2008, 07:54 AM Post #151 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
I find it quite amusing to be told that those of us who believe in God are irrational, and that the rational logic is found using physics - and then to be told that all matter and energy came from....... nothing........ Nothing exploded and created...... a universe full of something....... and the atheists say the religious are the ones who base their views on irrational faith...... |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Moonbat | May 25 2008, 08:18 AM Post #152 |
![]()
Pisa-Carp
|
No theory says that matter and energy come from nothing. Orthodox big bang theory says the question "where did matter and energy come from?" is logically inconsistent, other theories like quantum loop theory and string theory have alternative options. But the question is still pretty open because we don't have a theory of quantum gravity. This is not in any sense an argument for God - the ultimate point of "look there is something here it must have come from somewhere" remains whatever you do, if you say a mystical pillar did it you are left with the same question applied to the mystical pillar if you say God(s) did it you are left with the same question applied to the God(s) if you say it was a collison between branes floating in a higher dimensional space you are left with the question applied to the branes. Ultimately you either boil down to an ultimate beginning to which all question about "what became before" are logically inconsistent or you keep going back forever with each step having a prior step. (Quantum loop theory for instance treats the big bang as a point of inversion i.e. you keep going back and it looks like the universe is contracting and then you the hit the big bang and then you go back more and now you see the universe expanding and it looks like you are going forward again because before the big bang there was a universe that was always collapsing) Maybe matter and energy have always existed, maybe something else always existed that was a precursor to matter energy, maybe there was a mystical pillar, maybe there was a giant turtle, maybe it all sprung from a mystical island somewhere off the pacific that has always existed or any indeed other from the infinite set similar |
| Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem | |
![]() |
|
| John D'Oh | May 25 2008, 08:21 AM Post #153 |
|
MAMIL
|
What I'd really like to know is what did God do before he created the universe. I mean, he managed to create all that in 7 days - what did he do before then - live at home with his parents practicing? A bit like Eddie van Halen, perhaps, but less annoying. 'Oh for Pete's sake', they said (I'm not sure who Pete is), will you go out and DO something? Yes, you can take the apple, but leave the pink unicorn in your room, you'll only lose it. And for the love of Mike (again, I'm unsure of his exact identity), get rid of that bloody burning bush - it's an absolute menace! |
| What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket? | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | May 25 2008, 09:01 AM Post #154 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
Why, because you say it doesn't? That's an awful lot of "maybes" you have there - one would almost think you've hit the point that you are having to rely on faith..... "And God said "Let there be light". Did you know that at the point of creation, there was no sound? You can't create energy from nothing, Moonie. You said so yourself. You point to a spot in time where everything came from nothing, and by your own claim began a long process of random events, no controlling entity, just random events that all by themselves took on an order so perfect that all the sciences can now follow it - to a point... an order so perfect that if just one of countless thousands of differences had occurred, none of what we can now see here or in the universe would have happened. But you, in your "wisdom" have all the answers - answers even your superiors don't seem to know about. Amazing.... you should submit yourself to the greatest scientific organizations out there so they can write books about you, and elevate you beyond Einstein.... |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| sarah_blueparrot | May 25 2008, 09:11 AM Post #155 |
![]()
Fulla-Carp
|
Ah yes. It's that time in the argument when the need for nicknames emerges... |
|
Death is simply a shedding of the physical body like the butterfly shedding its cocoon. It is a transition to a higher state of consciousness where you continue to perceive, to understand, to laugh, and to be able to grow. - Dr. Elizabeth Kubler-Ross | |
![]() |
|
| Renauda | May 25 2008, 10:02 AM Post #156 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
In most instances I would suspect that the story was borrowed. In any case the world of the Fertile Crescent was pretty small and mythologies were shared similarly as they were with the Plains Indians of North America. |
![]() |
|
| Moonbat | May 25 2008, 10:05 AM Post #157 |
![]()
Pisa-Carp
|
It's got nothing to do with what i say it's just basic logic - the problem cannot be used as an argument for God because God does not solve it - i.e. you are left with the same question "but where did it all come from" applied to God. I'm not relying on faith for anything. I'm quite happy to say i don't know if there was a time before t=0 and if there was that i don't know what was going on then. The best guide we have at the moment are the various physical theories that are ultimately based on general relativity and quantum mechanics, (and hence all the evidence that supports those two theories) never the less our ideas are very speculative because we really don't have a good understanding of what gravity does at the scales that would be relevent for the big bang.
There couldn't be any "sound" there were no atoms and it's hardly suprising that primitive cultures might think light came first. What would have bee suprising is if had said "And God says let the4 forces be unified first then let gravity seperate off then let the strong nuclear force seperate from the electroweak force" that would be have been something but of course you never see anything like that. None of the creation myths match what has been discovered by modern science.
You keep talking about energy being created from nothing but i know of no theory that makes such a claim. Orthodox big bang theory says the question where did it come "from" is inconsistent. But really we don't have a good idea of went happened because we don't yet have a good theory of quantum gravitation. When you talk about random events - well there is difference between order and intelligence they are not the same concept. Water molecules are ordered in the sense that they attract one another a certain way and make certain patterns, but there is no need to say a mystical orderer makes them do so one can understand this order in terms of a small number of very simple relationships, one can understand the patterns, the "order" in everything we can see in the universe based on these small number of relationships - the laws of physics. Nothing is explained by adding a magic creator mind on top of that, every problem one has before one asserts this magic mind applies afterwards: You say that there are all these possibilities and if any of them had been true then the universe would be completely different, and you think that means there must be a creator but the logic doesn't work becase the same argument applies to your magic creator - how many hypothetically possible creators are there? There could have been a God who created a universe of sheep or a universe just composed of mountains or any an infinite number of hypothetical universe - for every description one can concieve of a particular creator who'd had made that world. So you see you are still left with the same problem. There are infinite number of hypothetically possible God so why is then is it true that this particular God who wanted to make this particular universe is the one that exists and none of the others? See, the whole idea is useless, it solves nothing actually it makes matters much worse because before one has these simple principles that explain everything so really the amount that is left inexplicable is in a sense small but if you posit an intelligence which is implicitly complex then you've now got a much bigger problem than you had to begin with.
Presumably by "my superiors" you mean the super scientific minds but they do know about it, that's why 92% of the American academy sciences do not subscribe to a monotheistic religion. That's why Einstein, Pauli, and Heisenberg, Schrodinger, Feynman and practically all of the great physicists of the recent past (and indeed the same applies to biologists or chemists) didn't subscribe to classical monotheistic ideas. |
| Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | May 25 2008, 10:12 AM Post #158 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
Well, yes God *does* solve it. And you are *not* left with the same question.
That would be laughable if it wasn't so sad.....
Then please, Moonie - by all means - tell us how to create energy from nothing. If you can do that, you will be rich beyond your wildest dreams, and you will have solved the world energy crisis. No other man on the face of the earth has been able to tell us how to create energy from nothing. Please - tell us how that's done.
You really don't have a clue what I'm talking about, do you? So much high and mighty talk, yet you can't follow a simple concept......
I've backed you into a corner, haven't I? When someone who claims to be as intelligent as you do drops such a flimsy straw man into a discussion, it's always because they are dodging and weaving...... quite funny.....] Another straw man or abject ignorance.. I'm trying to decide which.....
Ah, I see. You hero worship certain scientists, and want to be like them..... yet when I show you scientists who disagree with you, you simply dismiss them as not being scientists..... My point isn't whether they believe in God or not, Moonie. My point is that many of your superiors are educated enough, and mature enough, to admit that science cannot explain it all - and you aren't that well educated, or that mature. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Moonbat | May 25 2008, 10:21 AM Post #159 |
![]()
Pisa-Carp
|
How is the problem solved? You're still left with "but why does X exist" you've just swapped "universe" for "God". You're still left with but why that X, you've just swapped "universe" for "God". Any claims of specialness for God - oh God doesn't need explanation can be made equally for the universe. Infact unlike the case for God which is just rationalising to try get the conclusion you want it actually makes a certain amount of sense that our ideas of how things work and are, causality conservation laws etc. might not be applicable to the origin of the universe itself since they are ultimately properties of the universe. Of course you just do what you always do when you are thoroughly refuted - fall back on just claiming to be right, arbitrary assertion. Larry putting little stars in your sentences doesn't make your baseless statements any stronger. Look i can do it too: Why yes the existence of hedgehogs *does* show the moon landing was faked. You are *not* left with the same objections to a moonlanding conspiracy post observing that there are little mammals which have spines. Edit: Oh btw... i roxxor joo! |
| Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | May 25 2008, 10:31 AM Post #160 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
Yes.... Moonie has been backed into a corner.... and has come up short..... BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| sarah_blueparrot | May 25 2008, 10:31 AM Post #161 |
![]()
Fulla-Carp
|
![]() Oh Larry. You just don't see it... |
|
Death is simply a shedding of the physical body like the butterfly shedding its cocoon. It is a transition to a higher state of consciousness where you continue to perceive, to understand, to laugh, and to be able to grow. - Dr. Elizabeth Kubler-Ross | |
![]() |
|
| Moonbat | May 25 2008, 10:32 AM Post #162 |
![]()
Pisa-Carp
|
Oh not at all i replied after you edited your post to include those extra statements, i'll dissassemble them now if you like. |
| Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | May 25 2008, 10:35 AM Post #163 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
There's really no point in it, Moonie. You've already proven that you are not basing your views on science, but on faith - and that you will argue dishonestly rather than cede a point, or even follow good science. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | May 25 2008, 10:41 AM Post #164 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Well, six actually, even if speaking allegorically. Too often people want to place themselves as the most important thing in creation because we were the last thing God created, but in fact, the last thing that God did, and therefore, maybe highest and best thing God created, was the Day Off. Some could well argue that the fact that we humans were the last thing scratched off of God's "To Do" list before he headed out for the weekend could explain a lot.
|
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| Moonbat | May 25 2008, 10:57 AM Post #165 |
![]()
Pisa-Carp
|
Why yes the existence of hedgehogs *does* show the moon landing was faked. You are *not* left with the same objections to a moonlanding conspiracy post observing that there are little mammals which have spines.
Well i don't know how sad we should be that none of the creation myths turned out to be right, i mean we shouldn't be expect our forebears to have known the things we do simply because they passed on their ideas to subsequent generations who went and saw new things and came up with new ideas and created more knowledge and passed that and and so now living thousand years later, living after the likes of Darwin and Newton and Einstein and everyone else of course we have much greater insight into how things are than say the Israelites or the Aborigines, etc.
You're not listening as far as i know within the universe conservation of energy is absolute - but why are you talking about creating energy from nothing as if i think that happened? I don't know whether there was a before the big bang or if there was what happened then, i mean if there was a before i'm inclinded to expect conservation of energy to continue but really if some theory shows that conservation of energy stems from some deeper principle then sure I could accept it being violated pre big bang (if indeed there was a pre big bang).
Yea Larry that's right i'm the one who isn't following it ![]()
What straw man?
What straw man and what ignorance?
I do no such thing. There are believers who are scientists infact there are good scientsts who are believers but in general (as in most but not all) the uber scientists tend not to be. I do not look up to the people i named because they were not believers I look up to them because of what they achieved in terms furthering our knowledge of the world and for the way they did it, their insights into the nature of things, i admire them for the quality of their minds, and i confess a certain kinship to many of them because of the burning curiosity that many of them felt (and indeed that i feel). The American academy grants membership based on the highest achieving scientists, it's not that believers are dismissed it's that in general the people who know the most and have the finest minds can more easily see through religious claims.
I never claimed science could necessarily explain everything. If you read what i wrote to Dewey i specifically said that perhaps we can't explain qualia and perhaps nature is fundamentally inexplicable and perhaps even the things we already know something about - the fundamental partciles are ultimately inexplicable. I won't claim we definitively won't be able to explain everything, i don't know, it would be folly to simply assert we can't and not bother trying though. Particularly since history is littered with philosophers proclaiming sicence will never know something only for science to promply discover it. |
| Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem | |
![]() |
|
| Moonbat | May 25 2008, 11:10 AM Post #166 |
![]()
Pisa-Carp
|
I don't have faith, there is nothing i believe that i cannot explain why I believe. Nothing i think is 100%, everything is subject to reevalution if new evidence emerges. That's the antithesis of faith. As for "good science" Larry we both know you have no idea what that means, and dishonesty - what dishonesty? You can't answer me when i ask you how your magic creator mind supposedly solves the problem of existence - it patently doesn't because one can literally apply exactly the same questions simply using the word "God" instead of the word "universe". |
| Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | May 25 2008, 11:51 AM Post #167 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
Well, yes you do - and you relied on it several times in this thread. And the things you couldn't explain, you dodged.
Ah, back to that same old "out". You're smarter than anyone. More educated than anyone. Not only are you nowhere near the scientist you think you are, you are also deluded, and in denial.
That is a straw man Moonie, built on your own ignorance of God and religion.
Well, no.... one can't. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Moonbat | May 25 2008, 12:12 PM Post #168 |
![]()
Pisa-Carp
|
Specify where i relied on faith and what i dodged.
Hmm no answers to my arguments here.
Oh look none here either. And do you actually know what a straw man argument is?
No arguments here either, just an assertion and an assertion so trivially silly that one can definitively refute it by doing this: Where did God come from and why does God have the characteristics he does? You say one can't ask the same questions but i just did. Ooops! |
| Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | May 25 2008, 12:50 PM Post #169 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
Moonbat, what is love? Quantify it for me. Explain it to me scientifically. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Moonbat | May 25 2008, 01:06 PM Post #170 |
![]()
Pisa-Carp
|
Atleast have the honesty to accept your previous argument doesn't work before moving on to the next one. |
| Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | May 25 2008, 01:09 PM Post #171 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
I haven't moved on to "the next one", and my previous argument worked just fine. I can't help it if you lack the good sense to see that. My question is directly related. Answer it. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Moonbat | May 25 2008, 01:19 PM Post #172 |
![]()
Pisa-Carp
|
Your argument was that one couldn't ask this question: Where did God come from and why does he/she/it have the characteristic he/she/it has? But that question can be asked... - i've just asked it. Now i'm happy to move to other arguments but first have the decency to accept when you've been refuted. |
| Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | May 25 2008, 01:23 PM Post #173 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
You're asking that question shows your complete ignorance of God and the principles behind religion. God didn't "come" from anywhere. God IS. You cannot argue against that which you refuse to learn about. Now - answer my question: what is love? Quantify it for me. Explain it to me scientifically. Unless of course, science can't explain it.... a viewpoint that I'm willing to accept from you. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Moonbat | May 25 2008, 01:26 PM Post #174 |
![]()
Pisa-Carp
|
Ah i see ok so the universe didn't "come" from anywhere. The universe IS. There we go problem solved - excellent, no need to invoke God in the first place then.
I'll be happy answer your question just as soon as you accept that your prior argument has been refuted. |
| Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | May 25 2008, 02:01 PM Post #175 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
Yes, the universe came from somewhere. In your tiny little world that you worship, you have mistakenly concluded that God is the universe. What a ridiculous and silly deduction. And then you have the audacity to demand that I admit you refuted my argument, when it's *you* talking in circles, trying your best to avoid the real subject. The simple fact is, you CAN'T explain love using science. If you don't want to believe in God that is your choice. I'm not trying to change your mind, because you have long since decided that you are not open to your mind being changed. You are *afraid* to take an honest look. I am the first to admit that I am nowhere near the kind of person I should be. But my God teaches me that I am to tell you about him, and then if you refuse to listen, to kick the dust off my shoes and go on. But like I said - I'm not the person I should be. I don't care if you believe in God or not. What I *do* care about is having to listen to you constantly mocking God, and mocking those who believe, looking down your nose. You have no reason to look down your nose at anyone. You think you're smart, and you constantly tell me that I'm not. I've got news for you, kid. I'm every bit as smart as you are, and I have the added benefit of wisdom that comes from time and experience. You sit there in your tiny little world, thinking you have figured it all out - yet you are ignorant. You have nothing but the things you have learned from reading books. I just came back from watching a man bury his 5 year old daughter. If ever a man had a reason to deny God, he did. But he didn't - in fact, it made his faith stronger. Why? Because he knows something you don't. I'd explain it to you, but you can't even explain the meaning of love, so there's no way that you could comprehend anything deeper. If you want to talk about the little world of science, you go right ahead. Some day science will finally arrive at the point where they see how God did it. You won't get it though, because science is not what motivates you, even though that is your constant claim. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |










When someone who claims to be as intelligent as you do drops such a flimsy straw man into a discussion, it's always because they are dodging and weaving...... quite funny.....



11:27 AM Jul 11