Can you show this proof of God's existence to be wrong?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-11-2013, 11:42 PM
RE: Can you show this proof of God's existence to be wrong?
(07-11-2013 11:34 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(07-11-2013 11:24 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  You can't possibly be serious.
You don't get to tell anyone what they're talking about.
Is the structure of the universe an "eternal living being" that created itself at the big bang ?
Weeping

There is no evidence that the universe was created at the big bang. Big Bang theory only says the universe was hotter and more dense in the past then it is today. It says nothing about a "bang".

Also I don't consider God distinct from reality. I don't think Polis would either.

Big bang is just an analogy to the origin of matter/time expansion no once seriously claims it created matter no more than a wave at the beach creates water.

You simply dodged the point of you comparing the origin of reality to GOD.

Theism is to believe what other people claim, Atheism is to ask "why should I".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-11-2013, 11:43 PM (This post was last modified: 07-11-2013 11:49 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Can you show this proof of God's existence to be wrong?
(07-11-2013 11:34 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(07-11-2013 11:24 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  You can't possibly be serious.
You don't get to tell anyone what they're talking about.
Is the structure of the universe an "eternal living being" that created itself at the big bang ?
Weeping

There is no evidence that the universe was created at the big bang. Big Bang theory only says the universe was hotter and more dense in the past then it is today. It says nothing about a "bang".

Also I don't consider God distinct from reality. I don't think Polis would either.

There is a lot of evidence THIS universe was created at the Big Bang.
If your deity is Reality, then it must BOTH exist and not exist.
It is, of necessity, embedded in the structure of Reality, thus cannot be it's cause.
Polis is no Pantheist.
Thanks for refuting your deity for me.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2013, 12:07 AM
RE: Can you show this proof of God's existence to be wrong?
(07-11-2013 11:43 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  There is a lot of evidence THIS universe was created at the Big Bang.

No there isn't. Our physics breaks down before the planck temperature. We don't have a model of a bang because we don't have a physics capable of supporting such a model. Again the big bang theory states the universe was hotter and more dense in the past. It doesn't say anything about the actual bang itself.

Here is an argument for God's existence.

Premise 1: A supernatural event would prove God's existence.
Premise 2: A supernatural event is one that can't be modeled or described by the laws of physics.
Premise 3: The big bang happened.
Premise 4: The big bang is an event that cannot be described or modeled by the laws of physics.

Conclusion: The big bang is a supernatural event and thus proves the existence of God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2013, 12:24 AM
RE: Can you show this proof of God's existence to be wrong?
(07-11-2013 11:39 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  Basically he picks up a rock and claims it proves "god." The rest of it is rather pointless jargon.

He's one step away from Dr. Dino.

No...he makes an argument....a flawed one because he assumes his conclusion....but an argument none the less.

Now just because his argument is flawed doesn't mean we can't examine his assumptions and evaluate their validity. We might even be able to fix his argument if we can find a valid logic that leads us from his assumptions to his conclusions.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2013, 12:39 AM
RE: Can you show this proof of God's existence to be wrong?
(08-11-2013 12:07 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(07-11-2013 11:43 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  There is a lot of evidence THIS universe was created at the Big Bang.

No there isn't. Our physics breaks down before the planck temperature. We don't have a model of a bang because we don't have a physics capable of supporting such a model. Again the big bang theory states the universe was hotter and more dense in the past. It doesn't say anything about the actual bang itself.

Here is an argument for God's existence.

Premise 1: A supernatural event would prove God's existence.
Premise 2: A supernatural event is one that can't be modeled or described by the laws of physics.
Premise 3: The big bang happened.
Premise 4: The big bang is an event that cannot be described or modeled by the laws of physics.

Conclusion: The big bang is a supernatural event and thus proves the existence of God.

1: By definition a supernatural event is something we don't understand, its not PROOF of anything.
2: Dictionary meaning
3: its a theory
4: They are working on doing just that, can't is just the time before we could.

Evidence that something happened akin to an expansion from a singularity is close to a science fact. there is information there to reverse engineer.

Just because Your favorite GOD (thought oppressor) no longer makes sense in a world of education, you can't just keep planting his flag further and further back in time and still claim its valid.

CONCLUSION: GOD of the GAPS is just for people clinging onto their faith in the face of the obvious absurdity of it.

Theism is to believe what other people claim, Atheism is to ask "why should I".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2013, 12:47 AM (This post was last modified: 08-11-2013 12:54 AM by Adenosis.)
RE: Can you show this proof of God's existence to be wrong?
(07-11-2013 11:42 PM)sporehux Wrote:  Big bang is just an analogy to the origin of matter/time expansion no once seriously claims it created matter no more than a wave at the beach creates water.

You simply dodged the point of you comparing the origin of reality to GOD.

The beach was still in a state in which the water could exist before the wave came along, the early universe wasn't in a state in which the particles around today could exist for extended periods of time. Think black hole. Perhaps as a quark-gluon plasma but I don't think this was at the moment after the big bang, they had to 'crystalize' from the bath of energy, the universe had to expand and cool. So you could say that the matter in the universe originated at/after the big bang but not the energy that makes up that matter. Sorry for getting nit-picky.

(07-11-2013 11:43 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  There is a lot of evidence THIS universe was created at the Big Bang.
If your deity is Reality, then it must BOTH exist and not exist.
It is, of necessity, embedded in the structure of Reality, thus cannot be it's cause.
Polis is no Pantheist.
Thanks for refuting your deity for me.

I'm interested in this because I haven't heard of any, can you give some examples?

(08-11-2013 12:07 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Here is an argument for God's existence.

Premise 1: A supernatural event would prove God's existence.
Premise 2: A supernatural event is one that can't be modeled or described by the laws of physics.
Premise 3: The big bang happened.
Premise 4: The big bang is an event that cannot be described or modeled by the laws of physics.

Conclusion: The big bang is a supernatural event and thus proves the existence of God.

Please tell me this is a joke. "Look at nature, look at the trees! it looks so designed! There must be a creator!" is a better argument than this nonsense your posting. Have you given up attempting to be sensical and moved into the realm of utter incoherence? Oh wait you've always been this way. Don't mind me.

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2013, 01:03 AM (This post was last modified: 08-11-2013 01:08 AM by sporehux.)
RE: Can you show this proof of God's existence to be wrong?
(08-11-2013 12:47 AM)Adenosis Wrote:  
(07-11-2013 11:42 PM)sporehux Wrote:  Big bang is just an analogy to the origin of matter/time expansion no once seriously claims it created matter no more than a wave at the beach creates water.

You simply dodged the point of you comparing the origin of reality to GOD.

The beach was still in a state in which the water could exist before the wave came along, the early universe wasn't in a state in which the particles around today could exist for extended periods of time. Think black hole. Perhaps as a quark-gluon plasma but I don't think this was at the moment after the big bang, they had to 'crystalize' from the bath of energy, the universe had to expand and cool. So you could say that the matter in the universe originated at/after the big bang but not the energy that makes up that matter. Sorry for getting nit-picky.

definition: of the big bang

Theism is to believe what other people claim, Atheism is to ask "why should I".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2013, 01:11 AM
RE: Can you show this proof of God's existence to be wrong?
(08-11-2013 12:47 AM)Adenosis Wrote:  Please tell me this is a joke. "Look at nature, look at the trees! it looks so designed! There must be a creator!" is a better argument than this nonsense your posting. Have you given up attempting to be sensical and moved into the realm of utter incoherence? Oh wait you've always been this way. Don't mind me.

I put them in premise form so you can say, "Premise 1 is wrong because...." or Premise 2 is wrong because..."

As it stands your criticism of the argument doesn't say anything other than you disapprove......which isn't a compelling counter argument.


At least with Sporehux I know he rejects premise 1 because apparently to him supernatural events would not be proof of God. He rejects premise 2 because on the basis that it is a dictionary definition of "supernatural" and not his own. He rejects premise 3 because like evolution....its just a theory...and as the fundamentalist say....that doesn't prove anything....and he rejects premise 4 because someday he is sure they will have an explanation for it.....some day God will judge you too Sporehux.....as the fundies say....then you will know whats up.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2013, 01:14 AM (This post was last modified: 08-11-2013 01:19 AM by Adenosis.)
RE: Can you show this proof of God's existence to be wrong?
(08-11-2013 01:03 AM)sporehux Wrote:  
(08-11-2013 12:47 AM)Adenosis Wrote:  The beach was still in a state in which the water could exist before the wave came along, the early universe wasn't in a state in which the particles around today could exist for extended periods of time. Think black hole. Perhaps as a quark-gluon plasma but I don't think this was at the moment after the big bang, they had to 'crystalize' from the bath of energy, the universe had to expand and cool. So you could say that the matter in the universe originated at/after the big bang but not the energy that makes up that matter. Sorry for getting nit-picky.

definition: of the big bang

I don't suppose the beginning of the universe was an exception for the pauli exclusion principle? or perhaps they think the particles weren't stacked into the same state but were in a grid? (if that's what they think I'm fine with that, I simply haven't seen reason to believe it yet). Degeneracy Pressure of particles. See Electron/Neutron Degeneracy Pressures.

(08-11-2013 01:11 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I put them in premise form so you can say, "Premise 1 is wrong because...." or Premise 2 is wrong because..."

What would be the point? You'd go on believing as you believe regardless of the refutation.

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2013, 01:22 AM
RE: Can you show this proof of God's existence to be wrong?
(08-11-2013 01:11 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  it.....some day God will judge you too Sporehux.....as the fundies say....then you will know whats up.

If there is a God, and he is the "bible god" then I would have a moral obligation to despise him:

If there is a GOD and he is not a madman, then he would respect my reasoning for not believing it him based on the absurdity of the evidence for his existence.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Theist mode:

There is a Bible GOD, they go to heaven and spend an eternity on there knees sacrificing an infinite about of animals, having ribs ripped out willy nilly so god can create more bitches. living for ever with all the paedos and psycho murderers that just so happened to ask for forgiveness of their death beads.

There is a Non Bible GOD, God will say , " how the frak did you believe all that nonsense "

Theism is to believe what other people claim, Atheism is to ask "why should I".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: