Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-02-2013, 08:39 PM
RE: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
If the theistic fine-tuning argument was NOT an effective argument for intentional design, why then would there be any need to posit alternative extravagant theories like multiverse (which violates the principle of Occams Razor) in order to try and get around it?

We observe intentional precision and deliberate fine tuning in this universe all the time. Why is theistic fine-tuning so hard to accept.

Its extraordinary how far atheists like Mr Stenger and Mr Krauss will go in their efforts to avoid the God Conclusion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2013, 08:43 PM
RE: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
(11-02-2013 08:39 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  If the theistic fine-tuning argument was NOT an effective argument for intentional design, why then would there be any need to posit alternative extravagant theories like multiverse (which violates the principle of Occams Razor) in order to try and get around it?

We observe intentional precision and deliberate fine tuning in this universe all the time. Why is theistic fine-tuning so hard to accept.

Its extraordinary how far atheists like Mr Stenger and Mr Krauss will go in their efforts to avoid the God Conclusion.


There is no evidence of fine-tuning in the universe. The 'fine tuning argument' is a post hoc illusion; it has the cart before the horse.

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
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
11-02-2013, 10:12 PM
RE: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
I wonder what was before the big bang. Its easier for me to believe that matter/energy has always, always been than to believe there has always been a God. I can show you matter/energy. And if there is a God, considering the state of his creations on planet earth, He's either evil or totally indifferent. And what's the big deal about heaven--they got free pussy there or somethin?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2013, 10:19 PM
RE: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
(11-02-2013 08:43 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(11-02-2013 08:39 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  If the theistic fine-tuning argument was NOT an effective argument for intentional design, why then would there be any need to posit alternative extravagant theories like multiverse (which violates the principle of Occams Razor) in order to try and get around it?

We observe intentional precision and deliberate fine tuning in this universe all the time. Why is theistic fine-tuning so hard to accept.

Its extraordinary how far atheists like Mr Stenger and Mr Krauss will go in their efforts to avoid the God Conclusion.


There is no evidence of fine-tuning in the universe. The 'fine tuning argument' is a post hoc illusion; it has the cart before the horse.

Oh well, if were allowed to dismiss stuff we see, hear, touch, measure, etc. as just an illusion then you can kiss goodbye to empirical science.

Furthermore, I can now feel at liberty to dismiss YOUR impression of reality as equally being just an illusion. The apparent total absence of any fine tuning which you assert could just be your mind playing tricks on you in exactly the same way you accuse against those who perceive a difference between tuned and chaotic.

What objective datum do you have to tell the difference between finely tuned and NOT finely tuned?

SAND

[Image: tui-de-roy-minden-pictures-wind-patterns...5G100Z.jpg]


SAND

[Image: 157.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2013, 10:43 PM
RE: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
(11-02-2013 10:19 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  Oh well, if were allowed to dismiss stuff we see, hear, touch, measure, etc. as just an illusion then you can kiss goodbye to empirical science.

Furthermore, I can now feel at liberty to dismiss YOUR impression of reality as equally being just an illusion. The apparent total absence of any fine tuning which you assert could just be your mind playing tricks on you in exactly the same way you accuse against those who perceive a difference between tuned and chaotic.

What objective datum do you have to tell the difference between finely tuned and NOT finely tuned?
We typically don't dismiss stuff our senses pick up, however sometimes we do because we are aware that we can be subject to hallucinations and that when someone has a delusion they can twist a story to seem like it supports their delusion. So no, we don't need to say goodbye to empirical science.

Our impression of reality is based on the evidence of reality. It seems you don't understand the significance between the difference in our standards of evidence. Subjective experience is not reliable, if it was we would all be obliged to run from the giant spiders the tweaked junky is screaming about instead of realizing he could use some medical attention. If subjective experience is reliable, then every religion is true, not only yours.

You think our universe is finely tuned, so why was our body designed this way? not a very intelligent design if you ask me. If a human engineer can do better then what does that say about your so called designer?

We evolved in this universe under these conditions, we are fine tuned to the universe, not the other way around. There may be life in alternate universes with different physical laws and/or constants, we don't know. We also don't know a whole lot about how the big bang occurred or if there is a god. Yet here you are, assuming you know there is a god, and trying to lead evidence towards your opinion. Well that's not how it works, you let the evidence lead you to the answer.

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Adenosis's post
11-02-2013, 10:47 PM
RE: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
(11-02-2013 10:19 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  
(11-02-2013 08:43 PM)Chas Wrote:  There is no evidence of fine-tuning in the universe. The 'fine tuning argument' is a post hoc illusion; it has the cart before the horse.

Oh well, if were allowed to dismiss stuff we see, hear, touch, measure, etc. as just an illusion then you can kiss goodbye to empirical science.

Furthermore, I can now feel at liberty to dismiss YOUR impression of reality as equally being just an illusion. The apparent total absence of any fine tuning which you assert could just be your mind playing tricks on you in exactly the same way you accuse against those who perceive a difference between tuned and chaotic.

What objective datum do you have to tell the difference between finely tuned and NOT finely tuned?

SAND

[Image: tui-de-roy-minden-pictures-wind-patterns...5G100Z.jpg]


SAND

[Image: 157.jpg]


Evolution shows that life is fine-tuned to the universe, not the other way around.

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
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
11-02-2013, 11:44 PM
RE: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
(11-02-2013 04:01 PM)Egor Wrote:  The reason I'm here is because I don't want traffic at my site just yet. I will not go out and promote the First Veridican Church or the forum until it is ready, and it's not going to be ready until Easter. Then you'll see everything change--slow at first and then gathering steam as 2013 progresses.


Right....

So when your big debut fizzles out and no one outside of the TTA forums has even heard of a Verdican, do we then get to stone you to death for being a false prophet as per Deuteronomy?

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
11-02-2013, 11:54 PM (This post was last modified: 12-02-2013 05:20 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
(11-02-2013 08:39 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  If the theistic fine-tuning argument was NOT an effective argument for intentional design, why then would there be any need to posit alternative extravagant theories like multiverse (which violates the principle of Occams Razor) in order to try and get around it?

We observe intentional precision and deliberate fine tuning in this universe all the time. Why is theistic fine-tuning so hard to accept.

Its extraordinary how far atheists like Mr Stenger and Mr Krauss will go in their efforts to avoid the God Conclusion.
Intelligent design means "it's too complicated, and I don't get it, so I'll just use god of the gaps, as that's the best I can cook up, and it's easier than actually learning something".
Fine tuned for what. The life of a black hole is 80 times the life of the sun.
That means, that to 80 decimal places, there will be life .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000​001 % of the time the universe is in existence. You call THAT fine tuned ? For what ? Fine tuned for non-life ?
Can't you come up with ANYTHING new or intelligent, Pussy Cat, IRC ? What the fuck are you doing here anyway ? Making believers look stupid ? YOu actually think you're gonna "convert" someone with your pathetic level of education and argumentation ability ?
The Anthropic Principle is debunked.
If you had ever taken a course in Choas Theory, or knew about Math, you would know about the Mandlebrot Set. Patterns arise in chaos, spontaneously.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhdUp4JOHwg
Stupid design : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEl9kVl6KPc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ti3mtDC2fQo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KP3AY0iHEUA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8L9SbcEK_8

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
[+] 3 users Like Bucky Ball's post
12-02-2013, 04:11 AM (This post was last modified: 12-02-2013 05:26 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
(11-02-2013 10:19 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  Oh well, if were allowed to dismiss stuff we see, hear, touch, measure, etc. as just an illusion then you can kiss goodbye to empirical science.

Furthermore, I can now feel at liberty to dismiss YOUR impression of reality as equally being just an illusion. The apparent total absence of any fine tuning which you assert could just be your mind playing tricks on you in exactly the same way you accuse against those who perceive a difference between tuned and chaotic.

What objective datum do you have to tell the difference between finely tuned and NOT finely tuned?

SAND

[Image: tui-de-roy-minden-pictures-wind-patterns...5G100Z.jpg]


Positing the god hypothesis is the LAST possible explanation one would look at, as a "miracle" is the MOST improbable event that could ever happen. Here's your sand, and why you perceive patterns in it. It has nothing to do with the gods. You cannot see, hear, smell or measure your gods. So what are your standards ? You use one set when you like, and abandon it when you choose. Ever hear of "fractals" IRC ? I thought not. Are you actually expecting us to accept that your imaginary god put that second piece of crap in the sand ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patterns_in_nature When you see a pattern of gopher holes, do you presume your Jebus dug them ? Why not ? They are a pattern you see.
And BTW Pussy Cat IRC, multiverse theories, etc are in no way a response to theistic fine-tuning arguments. Science and Cosmology does not sit around worrying about ancient worldviews, and how to counter them. There is no reason to buy the "intentional design" if there is no one who had an "intention". You live in a deluded world. You failed utterly to prove the resurrection. You could not even discuss it, or your evidence for it. Then you posited free will, and did not defend it, in the face of evidence against it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkANniH8...1360666055
So the question is, what do you think you're doing here ?

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
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
12-02-2013, 05:11 AM
RE: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
(11-02-2013 10:19 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  
(11-02-2013 08:43 PM)Chas Wrote:  There is no evidence of fine-tuning in the universe. The 'fine tuning argument' is a post hoc illusion; it has the cart before the horse.

Oh well, if were allowed to dismiss stuff we see, hear, touch, measure, etc. as just an illusion then you can kiss goodbye to empirical science.

Furthermore, I can now feel at liberty to dismiss YOUR impression of reality as equally being just an illusion. The apparent total absence of any fine tuning which you assert could just be your mind playing tricks on you in exactly the same way you accuse against those who perceive a difference between tuned and chaotic.

What objective datum do you have to tell the difference between finely tuned and NOT finely tuned?

SAND

[Image: tui-de-roy-minden-pictures-wind-patterns...5G100Z.jpg]


SAND

[Image: 157.jpg]
What Bucky said in #49 ( not that you'll even understand half of what he says).

BUT....even you will understand this....the Romans crucified naughty boys naked...they were strung up to be laughed at....it was part of the humiliation...the hips were abducted...nails hammered in from the inner to outer heels. My point? Your sandy figure doesn't display jeebus' shlong. Not that I want to check it out...but...um...your lot degrades him by worshiping the poor son of a bitch being tortured...why not thoroughly degrade him by depicting him honestly?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: