Commentary on Agnostic Shane and Aliza's 6 day creation debate
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-01-2016, 10:21 PM (This post was last modified: 21-01-2016 10:52 PM by Bucky Ball.)
Commentary on Agnostic Shane and Aliza's 6 day creation debate
No one has defined what a god is. Creation (an "act") is incompatible with a timeless deity. 6 days or 6 trillion days. It's all bullshit. The Bible says nothing about creating a universe. It starts with the god "moving over the face of the deep". The cosmos (as the Hebrews and those in the ancient Near East thought of it), spacetime, and the ''deep" are all presumed as existing, a priori. We know humans had no notion of a "universe' until galaxies were discovered very recently.

We all know where this is going.

(17-01-2016 10:57 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Your statement pre supposes that reality exists pre self awareness.
How and when did you test this?
How did you get around the problem of knowing what existed before you became self aware?
Did you presuppose the existence of reality before you became self aware?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
21-01-2016, 10:23 PM
RE: Commentary on Agnostic Shane and Aliza's 6 day creation debate
Oh shit that is in the Boxing Ring and I posted? So sorry.

Admin's please delete my posts.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-01-2016, 05:04 AM
RE: Commentary on Agnostic Shane and Aliza's 6 day creation debate
(21-01-2016 10:13 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  The 6th day ends at the exact point in time when the verse was first revealed.

What the crap? Exactly in what reference is that supposed to be to or supposed to mean?

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-01-2016, 09:01 AM (This post was last modified: 22-01-2016 10:20 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Commentary on Agnostic Shane and Aliza's 6 day creation debate
"The catalyst will have created the world in exactly 6 days on the condition that no other thing except the catalyst existed before the singularity."

He's already made the MOST obvious and fundamental error.
There was no "before" the Big Bang. The dimensions of this universe (including spacetime), are not proveable (were not known to exist) until this universe came into existence. Time is a "thing".

He's already lost. His premise is founded on a false assumption. The phrase "before spacetime" is without any meaning.

Facepalm

Edit : "Existence" is also a "thing" ... a specific descriptor, asserting a state in reality. The statment "that no other thing except the catalyst existed before the singularity" assumes (without evidence or explanation) that the word "existence" refers to something real. Therefore along with the catalyst, reality was in place, and in that reality, the catalyst which "existed" participated only partially, (as it didn't "not exist"). So ... another illogical, false, underlying unrecognized assumption.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Bucky Ball's post
22-01-2016, 09:42 AM
RE: Commentary on Agnostic Shane and Aliza's 6 day creation debate
*looks at watch*
I'm bored of this debate already, and it hasn't even started.

A 6-day creation (big bang to evolution of homo-sapiens) would break so many laws of physics, it's not even funny. Why does anyone still try to argue this shit?

If we came from dust, then why is there still dust?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-01-2016, 09:46 AM
RE: Commentary on Agnostic Shane and Aliza's 6 day creation debate
Yeah. Agnostic Shane not off to a good start.

He seems to be falling into an apologetic hole, and doesn't seem to want to get out.

Don't Live each day like it's your last. Live each day like you have 541 days after that one where every choice you make will have lasting implications to you and the world around you. ~ Tim Minchin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-01-2016, 09:44 PM
RE: Commentary on Agnostic Shane and Aliza's 6 day creation debate
Quote:My age could be the age of the universe, if I start the clock of my existence as star dust state.

Meaningless drivel. Stars did not form for a few hundred million years, and then the first stars had to explode millions of years later as super novae, to form the heavier atoms necessary for life.
Picking an arbitrary start date just shows all this nonsense is built on nothing sound or real science.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-01-2016, 10:21 PM
RE: Commentary on Agnostic Shane and Aliza's 6 day creation debate
This thread title is confusing.

(28-01-2016 09:44 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
Quote:My age could be the age of the universe, if I start the clock of my existence as star dust state.

Meaningless drivel. Stars did not form for a few hundred million years, and then the first stars had to explode millions of years later as super novae, to form the heavier atoms necessary for life.
Picking an arbitrary start date just shows all this nonsense is built on nothing sound or real science.

That comment is from the Boxing Match with Paleophyte.

This one, for those that would like to follow along

Perhaps a new commentary thread would be a good idea?

(22-01-2016 09:01 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  "The catalyst will have created the world in exactly 6 days on the condition that no other thing except the catalyst existed before the singularity."
.
He's already made the MOST obvious and fundamental error.
There was no "before" the Big Bang. The dimensions of this universe (including spacetime), are not proveable (were not known to exist) until this universe came into existence. Time is a "thing".

He's already lost. His premise is founded on a false assumption. The phrase "before spacetime" is without any meaning.

Facepalm

Edit : "Existence" is also a "thing" ... a specific descriptor, asserting a state in reality. The statment "that no other thing except the catalyst existed before the singularity" assumes (without evidence or explanation) that the word "existence" refers to something real. Therefore along with the catalyst, reality was in place, and in that reality, the catalyst which "existed" participated only partially, (as it didn't "not exist"). So ... another illogical, false, underlying unrecognized assumption.

Apart from which... a catalyst catalyses.

Catalyst:
a substance that increases the rate of a chemical reaction without itself undergoing any permanent chemical change.

What's being catalysed? The 'no other thing'?

Huh

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-01-2016, 10:43 PM (This post was last modified: 28-01-2016 11:34 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Commentary on Agnostic Shane and Aliza's 6 day creation debate
(28-01-2016 10:21 PM)DLJ Wrote:  This thread title is confusing.

(28-01-2016 09:44 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Meaningless drivel. Stars did not form for a few hundred million years, and then the first stars had to explode millions of years later as super novae, to form the heavier atoms necessary for life.
Picking an arbitrary start date just shows all this nonsense is built on nothing sound or real science.

That comment is from the Boxing Match with Paleophyte.

This one, for those that would like to follow along

Perhaps a new commentary thread would be a good idea?

(22-01-2016 09:01 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  "The catalyst will have created the world in exactly 6 days on the condition that no other thing except the catalyst existed before the singularity."
.
He's already made the MOST obvious and fundamental error.
There was no "before" the Big Bang. The dimensions of this universe (including spacetime), are not proveable (were not known to exist) until this universe came into existence. Time is a "thing".

He's already lost. His premise is founded on a false assumption. The phrase "before spacetime" is without any meaning.

Facepalm

Edit : "Existence" is also a "thing" ... a specific descriptor, asserting a state in reality. The statment "that no other thing except the catalyst existed before the singularity" assumes (without evidence or explanation) that the word "existence" refers to something real. Therefore along with the catalyst, reality was in place, and in that reality, the catalyst which "existed" participated only partially, (as it didn't "not exist"). So ... another illogical, false, underlying unrecognized assumption.

Apart from which... a catalyst catalyses.

Catalyst:
a substance that increases the rate of a chemical reaction without itself undergoing any permanent chemical change.

What's being catalysed? The 'no other thing'?

Huh

Also a catalyst *acting* presupposes the *thing* (catalyst) as well as a few other properties (besides *existence*). For example, the forward motion of the reaction, the position, a priori, of the catalyst, causality, etc etc. Rolleyes

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
29-01-2016, 10:39 AM
RE: Commentary on Agnostic Shane and Aliza's 6 day creation debate
Quote:Is the word "scientific" used to denote a level of certainty on the spectrum of certainty? The highest being absolute certainty and the lowest being absolutely unknowable?

Heh heh. Facepalm

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: