After viewing the scale of the universe, I find it impossible to believe a god exists
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-09-2013, 05:38 PM (This post was last modified: 12-09-2013 05:43 PM by Chas.)
RE: After viewing the scale of the universe, I find it impossible to believe a god exists
(12-09-2013 03:31 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(12-09-2013 03:23 PM)childeye Wrote:  I still don't get it. Why again was matter not formed from energy?

'Matter' is not a scientific term.

In a relativistic sense, if used at all it simply means "that which contributes mass to a system". In more classical scenarios it is used to mean "that which is comprised of atoms".

In no sense is is "made of energy".

Actually, in every sense matter is made of energy.

When the universe formed, there was only energy. Until the universe expanded enough to reduce the frequency of that energy could matter form from it.

As the universe expanded, the wavelengths of the photons increased (the frequency decreased) making them less energetic to the point that matter could form.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2013, 05:47 PM
RE: After viewing the scale of the universe,
(12-09-2013 02:18 PM)childeye Wrote:  My only point is only to say we can't put limits on what God can or can't do ....

So I am pretty sure it is beyond our pay grade to say God can't exist simply because the universe is too big or complex . If God is eternal then the entire universe and all that is in it may be a speck from some other perspective.
The size of the universe, from any perspective, is irrelevant to the question of god's existence. What is relevant is the complete lack of evidence suggesting there is such a being. Provide a body of measurable, verifiable data which has no possible natural explanation, either discovered or undiscovered. When you can prove the absence of possible natural causes, then you can claim "God" exists.

You can lead a theist to reason, but, you cannot make him think.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2013, 07:32 PM
RE: After viewing the scale of the universe, I find it impossible to believe a god exists
(12-09-2013 05:47 PM)NoSkyDaddy Wrote:  
(12-09-2013 02:18 PM)childeye Wrote:  My only point is only to say we can't put limits on what God can or can't do ....

So I am pretty sure it is beyond our pay grade to say God can't exist simply because the universe is too big or complex . If God is eternal then the entire universe and all that is in it may be a speck from some other perspective.
The size of the universe, from any perspective, is irrelevant to the question of god's existence. What is relevant is the complete lack of evidence suggesting there is such a being. Provide a body of measurable, verifiable data which has no possible natural explanation, either discovered or undiscovered. When you can prove the absence of possible natural causes, then you can claim "God" exists.
Semantics. It could be said everything that exists is evidence of God. It's all how one defines the term God. In it's most common usage it is an ultimate Truth of all things, the beginning and the end, etc... Hence there are false gods just as numerous as peoples opinions of what that Truth is.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2013, 07:44 PM
RE: After viewing the scale of the universe, I find it impossible to believe a god exists
(12-09-2013 05:38 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(12-09-2013 03:31 PM)cjlr Wrote:  'Matter' is not a scientific term.

In a relativistic sense, if used at all it simply means "that which contributes mass to a system". In more classical scenarios it is used to mean "that which is comprised of atoms".

In no sense is is "made of energy".

Actually, in every sense matter is made of energy.

When the universe formed, there was only energy. Until the universe expanded enough to reduce the frequency of that energy could matter form from it.

As the universe expanded, the wavelengths of the photons increased (the frequency decreased) making them less energetic to the point that matter could form.

Mass and energy are two properties of physical systems. Matter is a physical system. Therefore mass and energy are properties of matter. Mass and energy are characteristics of matter, not the ingredients of matter.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2013, 07:48 PM
RE: After viewing the scale of the universe, I find it impossible to believe a god exists
(12-09-2013 07:32 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(12-09-2013 05:47 PM)NoSkyDaddy Wrote:  The size of the universe, from any perspective, is irrelevant to the question of god's existence. What is relevant is the complete lack of evidence suggesting there is such a being. Provide a body of measurable, verifiable data which has no possible natural explanation, either discovered or undiscovered. When you can prove the absence of possible natural causes, then you can claim "God" exists.
Semantics. It could be said everything that exists is evidence of God. It's all how one defines the term God. In it's most common usage it is an ultimate Truth of all things, the beginning and the end, etc... Hence there are false gods just as numerous as peoples opinions of what that Truth is.

No, it's not. In its most common usage, it's a supernatural intelligence or being.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2013, 08:08 PM (This post was last modified: 12-09-2013 08:27 PM by childeye.)
RE: After viewing the scale of the universe, I find it impossible to believe a god exists
(12-09-2013 07:48 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(12-09-2013 07:32 PM)childeye Wrote:  Semantics. It could be said everything that exists is evidence of God. It's all how one defines the term God. In it's most common usage it is an ultimate Truth of all things, the beginning and the end, etc... Hence there are false gods just as numerous as peoples opinions of what that Truth is.

No, it's not. In its most common usage, it's a supernatural intelligence or being.
All that supernatural being means to me is someone I cannot understand or comprehend. Could be a reptilian extra terrestrial that would fit that description. Ultimate Truth to me is all knowing, as in the source, cause and reason of all things.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2013, 08:36 PM
After viewing the scale of the universe, I find it impossible to believe a god exists
(12-09-2013 05:38 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(12-09-2013 03:31 PM)cjlr Wrote:  'Matter' is not a scientific term.

In a relativistic sense, if used at all it simply means "that which contributes mass to a system". In more classical scenarios it is used to mean "that which is comprised of atoms".

In no sense is is "made of energy".

Actually, in every sense matter is made of energy.

When the universe formed, there was only energy. Until the universe expanded enough to reduce the frequency of that energy could matter form from it.

As the universe expanded, the wavelengths of the photons increased (the frequency decreased) making them less energetic to the point that matter could form.

At a gut level, I want to say the same thing "matter is made of energy", but it's the same thing as saying "matter is made of motion" or "heat is made of temperature".

We quantify states of matter or properties of forces as units of energy.
Energy is a value, not so much a state of matter, but it is used as a catch all word to describe forces and or unified forces that we don't have a proper name or description for. In much the same way we can describe the mass of a black hole that contains only gravity (no mass), we use the term energy to describe forces at work.

I will say that it's a difficult word topic to accurately describe.
If you can replace the word energy with movement, then maybe you'll get a sense of what energy is or is not.
As you heat up water on the stove, heat energy from the coils and or flames (gas stove) are transferred to the pan and then from the pan to the water causing the molecules to move around more until the water boils into steam.

It's a transference of motion at the molecular and atomic level

When we look at what we think happened at the beginning of the universe, we have a unified field where the four fundamental forces (strong, weak, electro-magnetic & gravity) all together as one force and also unstable.

We use the word energy to describe the work those forces unleash as the unstable (unified force) expands a space & time continuum through which those fundamental forces cool into some of the first basic particles of matter. If you want to say that matter is made from the fundamental forces moving & cooling through space time, I think a good case could be made for that, but energy is simply the word we use to describe a value of work, a value of motion over a distance.

Does that make sense ?

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2013, 08:44 PM
RE: After viewing the scale of the universe, I find it impossible to believe a god exists
(11-09-2013 11:01 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  
(11-09-2013 10:31 PM)theword Wrote:  "the earth is small, therefore God does not exist"... can you see how stupid you people are? What does the size of the earth have to do with God?

"there's something unknown, therefore god must exist, and it's got to be the god of the bible".....can you see how deluded you people are? What the fuck does one (as yet) unknown in the vast expanse of the cosmos have to do with the fucking bible?
Nice try, you still make no sense.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2013, 08:47 PM
RE: After viewing the scale of the universe, I find it impossible to believe a god exists
(12-09-2013 12:09 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(11-09-2013 10:31 PM)theword Wrote:  "the earth is small, therefore God does not exist"... can you see how stupid you people are? What does the size of the earth have to do with God?

Yeah it would be stupid, if that wasn't a strawman.






If you lived your entire life in a cave and never seen the outside world, from reading the Koran or the Bible you might get the impression that the stars are merely numerous decorations god placed in the sky simply to impress us. And when you left your cave for the very first time and looked up at the stars, you would be impressed, and you might think the scripture had told you the truth. That such beauty can pull anyone down to their knees, even an atheist like myself. For the religious the mere mention of the stars in scripture is evidence enough to prove the God of the Bible or Allah of the Koran knew all about them. But the religious never seem to notice that in a thousand pages God couldn't and didn't tell us one damn thing that isn't obvious to the naked eye at a single glance. For when the poetry is put aside all that the holy books really say is that there are many stars and they have great beauty; yet a child can tell you that. Think about it. A child can tell you as much about the stars as God did.

I believe in America it's called a 'flim-flam', a deception. In this case the dazzling of another's mind with words. Giving the impression of knowledge without any information content at all. But the religious can't see that, they've been blinded by the light. For an omnipotent god's plan to proceed, for the struggle between good and evil to play out exactly as described in the holy books, all that is required is for the existence of the Earth and the Sun. One star is all that's needed, although a truly all powerful god could simply make the light and heat we need rain down from the sky without any obvious or rational or explicable cause. Or he could make it so that we don't need light and heat at all, but of course the religious imagination isn't free enough to grasp this. They'll say 'The Lord moves in mysterious ways', a cunning bit of religious programming that just happens to stop any curiosity before it can pull out of the station.

But for argument's sake, lets say that God for his own mysterious reasons, wants the light provided by nuclear fusion and nucleosynthesis in the Sun; and photosynthesis on Earth. He still only needs one star and one planet, anything beyond that would be window dressing. In such an empty universe it would indeed seem that the Earth was a special place and the focus of creation, adding tremendous weight to the Earth-centered religious beliefs. But by that same token if there were two suns, that would bring the Earth-centered religions into doubt. That would be doubly true if there were three suns, and for each additional sun after that the doubts grow.

If there were only one world, it might be unreasonable to say that life exists on the one world by chance alone. For atheistic ideas to have any support, for it to be true that life arose by pure coincidence and conditions and elements, there must be more than one Sun; more than one roll of the dice. In a universe with two Suns help the atheistic argument, but not by much. Three suns would offer only a slight improvement upon that. The current estimates, linked to the research in the side bar, suggest that there are seventy sextillion (70,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) stars in the observable universe alone; and very good reasons to believe the actual universe is far, far, far, far, far larger. Seventy sextillion? Each one of these countless chances for life is an argument in favor of atheism, at least in it's opposition to the Earth-centered religions of Christianity and Islam.

Now let's look at what the holy books say about the stars. First of all Christianity, via Genesis chapter 22, verse 17. "That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiply I will multiply thy seed as the stars in the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies." Christian apologetics will say that this passage proves that the Christian God knew how many stars there are; but all it proves is that they don't know what proof is, or they're relying on you to not know. Look at the passage again, why is it there? What is it saying? In essence all it actually says is 'worship me and I will make you so numerous and so countless that nothing can stand in your way'. It should be obvious why a passage like this is in a holy book of a proselytizing religion intent on converting as many people as possible. All religions want to be the only religion, all people want to belong to the biggest gang; it's a hideous synchronicity.

It makes us feel safe, which we must feel to be happy; and if religion can make you feel safe and happy, you're more than halfway in it's pocket. It would after all be pretty dumb to write in a holy book 'worship me and there won't be enough of you to make up a soccer team', let alone defend yourselves in a perpetual war-zone with few resources. Now think for a moment about the concept of countlessness, that which is beyond count; and ask for yourself if you wanted to convey a huge number, how would you do it to the people of the Bronze Age used to counting only a few goats? One might be tempted to use metaphors like 'trees in a forest' or 'raindrops in the sky' or 'blades of grass in a field', but these things would be outside the everyday experience of those living in and around the deserts of the Middle East thousands of years ago. What other imagery might be of use?

It's simple poetry, obvious imagery that can be found in many other works of fiction. Anyone who has been to the deserts of the Middle East at night knows the number of stars visible to the naked eye vastly exceeds the numbers seen in most of the locations on the planet. It's obvious why the Bible conveys countlessness via such imagery, what could be more numerous to the uneducated mind than the stars and the sand? But if you think that passage is conveying an actual number you should note that God has failed his followers miserably. For there are only a couple of billion Christians, so God has not 'multiplied your seed as the stars in the heavens'. Far from it, he was off by a factor of over a trillion, and in mathematical terms this is called FAIL. Seventy sextilion is actually ten times the number of all of the grains of sand on all of the beaches and in all of the deserts of Earth. So the poetry in Genesis chapter 22 cannot be considered compelling proof that the Abrahamic god knew how many stars there actually are. It is literally no wonder, no cause for wonder, that when trying to convey countlessness the Bible links to stars and sand.

And as for the Koran, in Sura 67 verse 5 it says "And we have (from of old) adorned the lowest heaven with... lamps, and we have made such lamps as missiles to drive away Satans..." So there you have it, the Koran says the stars are lamps to keep away devils. So much for science in the Koran. But there is something else I'd like you to consider, both holy books refer to the stars and the Sun. Why? Obviously part of the reason is to explain the pretty lamps.. stars. But why in particular did the holy books talk about stars and the Sun? Why do they never, not once, tell us that the stars are Suns and that our Sun is just an ordinary star like countless others. You know why. It's because those who write the Bible, just like the people of the time, didn't know.

Everyone wants to know where they came from, and that search when conducted honestly will lead you to the stars. And if you don't know what a star is, you are either very very young or you're just not trying. I'm not saying there was no creative intelligence behind this universe, but if it existed at all, it was a scientist, a physicist; not a magician. It's tools were physical forces, not people. Such an intelligence would not be an unintelligent or angry as the supernatural and indeed unnatural God of the Bible and the Koran, who flies off in a homicidal sadistic rage if you simply doubt him; having supposedly built a universe that inspires more and more doubt the more you learn about it. Quickness to anger decreases with understanding, and judging from the threats of the hot-heading Abrahamic god , he didn't understand very much at all.

The very beginning, the one true gap that remains may always be a gap, always leaving space for belief of a rational kind. Science will never take that away, and may even help you understand your creator better than you do now. But by worshiping such an unworthy, blood drenched, and primitive idol, you insult whatever creator there may have been. Atheists meanwhile cannot believe that the creator of this universe would be so immature, and in that sense atheists give that creator, if they ever existed, more respect than a Christian or a Muslim ever could. We cannot believe in your god, we cannot believe in a god that makes knowledge an obstacle to belief, we cannot believe in a god who is obsessed with one species, on one planet, orbiting one star.

Write a new holy book, put in there just one page, and on that page simply put a question mark; and then we can talk about it. Until then, the stars are on our side. -philhellenes

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3085885.stm
I don't know if that dissertation was directed at me, mainly because I did not take the hour to read it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2013, 08:54 PM
RE: After viewing the scale of the universe, I find it impossible to believe a god exists
(12-09-2013 08:08 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(12-09-2013 07:48 PM)Chas Wrote:  No, it's not. In its most common usage, it's a supernatural intelligence or being.
All that supernatural being means to me is someone I cannot understand or comprehend. Could be a reptilian extra terrestrial that would fit that description. Ultimate Truth to me is all knowing, as in the source, cause and reason of all things.

We're not talking about your bizarre understanding. You said "its most common usage".

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: