| 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: |
| Are you an atheist? I am, and so should you.; (be one that is) | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 15 2009, 07:59 PM (4,795 Views) | |
| The 89th Key | Jul 16 2009, 05:57 AM Post #51 |
|
Guys - he's baiting. Stop biting. Lolz |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Jul 16 2009, 06:17 AM Post #52 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
So I should work to get others to share my perspective? Where does diversity, tolerance and respect for others come in? You can't have it both ways. Can you? |
![]() |
|
| Luke's Dad | Jul 16 2009, 06:46 AM Post #53 |
![]()
Emperor Pengin
|
QFT
|
| The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it. | |
![]() |
|
| LWpianistin | Jul 16 2009, 07:01 AM Post #54 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
No, it doesn't because he claimed children are JUST like their parents. That's never correct. |
| And how are you today? | |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Jul 16 2009, 07:03 AM Post #55 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
You changed my words. |
![]() |
|
| Luke's Dad | Jul 16 2009, 07:05 AM Post #56 |
![]()
Emperor Pengin
|
Right, he claimed that parents want there children to be just like them, and that most of the time it works. |
| The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it. | |
![]() |
|
| LWpianistin | Jul 16 2009, 07:05 AM Post #57 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
No, I didn't. |
| And how are you today? | |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Jul 16 2009, 07:14 AM Post #58 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Yes, you are right I said that. I'm clear that is not what I mean. I mean when it comes to imparting religion (or atheism) your kid is the only one you can do that to, or try to anyway. I said can, not should. Personally I feel children should be kept neutral on such a subject. Answer the child's question with, there are no absolutes, vut there are many opinions on that and you will form your own opinion when you grow up. Donning flame suit. |
![]() |
|
| LWpianistin | Jul 16 2009, 07:22 AM Post #59 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Ok. I agree. My parents didn't have me or my brother baptized for that reason. They wanted us to explore religion on our own. I did end up going to Sunday school, some church, and youth groups until I disagreed (when the pastor said questioning God is wrong, and women are inferior. F that). I also took 3 or 4 Religious Studies classes through school, so I know a fair amount about other religions, too. |
| And how are you today? | |
![]() |
|
| CrashTest | Jul 16 2009, 07:49 AM Post #60 |
|
Pisa-Carp
|
IT - your point about being simply biomachines and our sense of justice or morality is interesting, but don't forget that for all practical purposes, if there is a god or not, religion has been a strong influence on thinking. It does not mean it is correct or the best path, though. In our early history I am sure our ideas on what is right and moral were much more crass; morality evolves - look at slavery, and things of that nature. What I mean by this is that morality evolves due to human thinking - and not any sort of interception of a creator. Even religion is human philosophy, moral codes for living. Attaching a god to it makes it vastly more marketable to the world - and like I said, if religion could be made secular and wiped out of ignorance, superstition, and backwards thinking - a lot of the teachings are indeed positive. (Some of the backwards thinking I see that affect the world don't even have to go as far as extremists in the world and violence - but simple things like refusing to allow condoms in AIDS heavy places like africa, etc.) Larry - what I just don't feel that creation is needed - I mean, to believe in that surpasses the idea that matter organized itself into what we are now over time - you have to actually believe that something exists so powerful and perfect that we have no notion of it, no way to explain it - and I don't think any evidence in our living, breathing world ever pointed to anything other than nature being autonomous. |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Jul 16 2009, 07:50 AM Post #61 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I think the majority of parents who bring their kids to Sunday school, or Saturday School, or keep them far away from any religious exposure, would be furious at me for suggesting they place their children in that "respect diversity" category that they place adults in. I think that many religious people, and atheists, really believe that their beliefs apply to everyone and they want and even expect their kids to share those beliefs because those beliefs are not just beliefs, the are RIGHT! I see their point. What I am suggesting is a paradox. |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Jul 16 2009, 08:29 AM Post #62 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
The fact that chaos organized itself into what it did does far more than just suggest something was behind it. But you have chosen to believe that nothing exploded into something, and chaos organized itself into a system so finely tuned that just one small change and none of it would have happened. I just don't have enough faith to believe that. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| CrashTest | Jul 16 2009, 08:33 AM Post #63 |
|
Pisa-Carp
|
But perhaps it isn't just chaos and randomness - I think it happened in a more logical way, a series of steps. For example, chaos could not produce us as we currently are - but it could produce something very simple, that could in turn develop into something more complex through time, natural selection, etc. So we can't view the big picture when talking about where we stand now - but the small elements that started and created this. Remember, the universe is completely governed by very tangible laws - everything is building blocks and constantly changing. |
![]() |
|
| John D'Oh | Jul 16 2009, 08:48 AM Post #64 |
|
MAMIL
|
I'm an atheist and my kids go to Sunday school. All I want for my kids is that they grow up to be happy. |
| What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket? | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Jul 16 2009, 08:48 AM Post #65 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
(original post) How the universe has come to be: The Truth of Cosmology, Theology, Intelligent Design, and Evolution Let's get few basic things cleared up:
Here's the complete and total truth about how it all really came to be: 7. Modern science has pretty much worked out the evolutionary map from what we see today as animals and plants back to the "primodial soup," and that's basically correct. Let's skip this part and work backwards. It's noted that the "evolution" was "guided" within the confines of "limits" and "standard constants" set by an Intelligent Designer. 6. Modern science has pretty much worked out the cosmology from what we observe today as planets, stars, galaxies, "black holes," etc. all the way to the "Big Bang." Let's skip this part too and work from the "Big Bang" and go backwards. It is also noted that the gradual formation of planets, stars, galaxies, "black holes," etc. was "guided" within the confines of "limits" and "standard constants" set by an Intelligent Designer. 5. An Intelligent Designer did set the initial condition for "Big Bang" to happen. What modern science and monotheistic "creator-god" based theology haven't got right is: "How that Intelligent Designer came to be?" 4. Truth is, the Intelligent Designers themselves are products of creationism and guided evolution. There is a large number of para-universes, each having anywhere from seven and quarter to 38 - 13/16 dimensions, each filled with trans-mutonic-bisenthium particles, quasi-tetronurineon-strings, and psuedo-quisaridium-thetabranes vibrating, moving, colliding, combining, and eventually forming what became the Intelligent Designers, one of whom created the Big Bang that gave birth to our universe, one of many he designed and created. 3. Of course, the vibration, movement, collision, and combinations of the trans-mutonic-bisenthium particles, supra-quasi-tetronurineon-strings, and psuedo-quisaridium-thetabranes, though seemingly "random" even to most of the Intelligent Designers, are actually operating within tight limits and, in that sense, precisely guided by yet a higher order Designer. 2. The higher order Designer, known as the Grand Original Designer, or GOD, created those large number of para-universes and set the initial conditions for each of them. One of which gave birth to our Intelligent Designer. 1. The GOD itself is a product of random chance. Its four base elemental materials are luminousitope-isochron, omni-zenthium, varianeum-sumaunicron, and equison. 0. The luminousitope-isochron, omni-zenthium, varianeum-sumaunicron, and equison are available in abundance and interact randomly in a fourty two dimensional super-para-universe that just is and has always been there. And that is how it all came to be. |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Jul 16 2009, 08:59 AM Post #66 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Cool. ParaD'oh. |
![]() |
|
| Moonbat | Jul 16 2009, 09:02 AM Post #67 |
![]()
Pisa-Carp
|
|
| Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Jul 16 2009, 09:09 AM Post #68 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
That's where I assumed you were going-- option 3 -- so on the same terms the universe is not only self aware but eats, sleeps (at which point it is not aware) and takes a dump. What a marvelous universe!!!
|
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Jul 16 2009, 09:10 AM Post #69 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
It must be marvelous? |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Jul 16 2009, 09:17 AM Post #70 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Perhaps therein lies the problem. The atheist has a less-marvelous explanation. Marvelous is nicer. |
![]() |
|
| QuantumIvory | Jul 16 2009, 09:25 AM Post #71 |
|
Senior Carp
|
For what it's worth, Crash, I can probably understand somewhat where you're coming from. Without getting into any detail, I've gone from fundamentalist Christian (early years), to atheist (for most of my adult life), to believer in God again (not, however, an adherent to the divinity of Jesus). I am now 54 and most of my post-teenage life was spent as a raging atheist who decried believers of any kind as weak and naive. I regret those years, not only for my pomposity toward those people of faith, but also for my own naivete. No one is able to "prove" God's existence, just as no one is able to provide proof that he doesn't exist. Despite what many claim, faith runs rampant in both religion and science. I do not belong to any "religion" and haven't gone to church since those teen years, but I can tell you I very much believe in God. Ultimately, of course, it's you that makes the conscious decision on the existence of a Creator. Two insightful books (for me, anyway) you might find interesting are: Here and Here (Oddly enough, both were written by physicists.) |
|
"I regard consciousness as fundamental. We cannot get behind consciousness." -Max Planck | |
![]() |
|
| Moonbat | Jul 16 2009, 09:35 AM Post #72 |
![]()
Pisa-Carp
|
All the phrase does is draw attention to what we are and what we are part of. The dynamics of the universe are associated with awareness (and we are that awareness) that is the sense in which the universe is aware. Our minds are mirrors through which the world is reflected. |
| Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem | |
![]() |
|
| VPG | Jul 16 2009, 09:45 AM Post #73 |
|
Pisa-Carp
|
Being an athiest is sort of like being all dressed up with no place to go. . .One question about the "Big Bang". What blew up? Anyone? |
|
I'M NOT YELLING.........I'M ITALIAN...........THAT'S HOW WE TALK! "People say that we're in a time when there are no heroes, they just don't know where to look." Ronald Reagan, Inaugural, 1971 | |
![]() |
|
| Moonbat | Jul 16 2009, 09:47 AM Post #74 |
![]()
Pisa-Carp
|
I suspect the arguments in those books don't actually work - from the reviews the first one seems to be the fine tuning argument again, the second looks interesting but he's trying to build a case like Penrose that the brain is operating as a quantum computer but decoherence really seems to knock that idea out and i suspect he's going to do something horrible and invoke the measurement problem as proof of God. However i might read one or perhaps both of them anyway, it's always worth reading people who seem to believe strange things incase they have some interesting reasons for doing so that you haven't heard before. (They can't possibly be worse than Alistair McGrath) |
| Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem | |
![]() |
|
| Moonbat | Jul 16 2009, 09:49 AM Post #75 |
![]()
Pisa-Carp
|
The entire universe blew up. |
| Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem | |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |







QFT


6:50 AM Jul 11