Hasn't god been disproved?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-04-2012, 05:27 AM
RE: Hasn't god been disproved?
(25-04-2012 12:33 PM)Ghost Wrote:  Sup, Ben.
It would seem that we are way off.

I'll try a different tact, then.

(25-04-2012 12:33 PM)Ghost Wrote:  
Quote:If you are to continue arguing that supernatural beings can't be tested by science then I think you should reasonably:
1. Define what properties the set of these supernatural things have, and
2. Describe exactly why those properties are not testable by science.
They have but one property: they are not limited by natural law.
Natural law has one property: It limits. A temperature of -5 billion centigrade is impossible. Utterly. Absolute zero is -273 degrees Celsius or 0 degrees Kelvin. That is a limit that no phenomenon in the universe can circumvent. A supernatural being is not limited by natural law because it is not subject to natural law. It can do whatever it wishes. -5 billion degrees is no problem for them.
Bullshit. We know the physics of how our universe works. We don't know the physics of any possible "multiverse" or other context outside of our universe. We could be a computer simulation that some arsehole just decided to press "pause" on and patch some shit. Pretending that our universe is "natural" and the physics of the boiling mass of waste energy we formed within are immutable is kindergarten nonsense. We have gotten to know the physics of our universe, but we don't know the physics of what lies beyond. Perhaps there are beings outside in their own domain that can suspend our natural laws. Why couldn't there be? Does that make them supernatural? Your definition for supernatural equates to "beings that operate under a different set of physics our what we have so far observed". Well, no shit sherlock. We didn't understand how birds could fly a thousand years ago. They seemed to be defying the constant of physics that things naturally fall. Did that make them supernatural?

There is absolutely no point you using the word supernatural again, and there is no point in my replying further until you have identified a single example of a being that you would call supernatural. Otherwise we're simply talking about creatures outside of our universe that can interact with our universe in surprising ways. You're falling into the classic theist fallacy of arguing a strawman. You say creatures can exist outside our universe and interact with it in surprising ways? Well, great. I can buy that. I'd call them natural you would call them supernatural. Great. Now - name one. Tell me something about is behaviour and it'll disprove the fuck out of it.

(25-04-2012 12:33 PM)Ghost Wrote:  The reason supernatural phenomena are not testable by science is because they are immeasurable.
Bullshit. The sick child got measurably better.
(25-04-2012 12:33 PM)Ghost Wrote:  There are limits to measurement.
Wow, there are limits to what we can measure. How surprising. Ever talk to a string theorist about how they're going to get a microscope so precise they can see a string?
(25-04-2012 12:33 PM)Ghost Wrote:  Whatever lies BEYOND those limits is, by definition, supernatural.
Bullshit, you just described string theory as supernatural.
(25-04-2012 12:33 PM)Ghost Wrote:  
Quote:You are saying things like supernatural beings are able to act
independently of physics. I'm thinking that when you use the term you
are meaning they are able to act independently of the physics of the known universe.
I sense an unintentional language trap.
Sure, the trap is in defining "supernatural" things as things that interact with our universe in surprising ways. It's a definition so broad as to escape any kind of reasoning about it and one so imprecise that allows you to to fall into a hundred gaping logical fallacies.
(25-04-2012 12:33 PM)Ghost Wrote:  I don't care about the KNOWN universe. Space-time. That's our universe. Whether it's finite or infinite, I have no idea. We know that we are in a universe and that that universe is governed by natural law. We might not understand all of those laws, but we know they're there.
Blah blah blah. There might be other "stuff" out there other than spacetime. What the hell do you think theoretical physicists do all day? That's exactly what they're thinking about nonstop, baby.
(25-04-2012 12:33 PM)Ghost Wrote:  Physics is a natural law. I don't know if we understand physics properly or not and I don't care because it's irrelevant. We know that physics is a natural law whether we understand it or not.
The word physics is clearly confusing you. Let me define it for you: It's the properties of a "thing" real or imagined or a description of that "thing"s behaviour. For example, "god answers prayer" is describing the physics of "god". Even better it states a property that expressed and measurable within our universe, and is entirely within the domain of science to verify or refute. Great! Look and see how science is able to reason about your supernatural things! Would you care to name a supernatural being whose existence cannot be tested by science?


(25-04-2012 12:33 PM)Ghost Wrote:  E=MC2, D=RT, and object in motion stays in motion, for each reaction there is an equal and opposite reaction. To you and me, these laws are absolute.
Sigh. These are all best guesses. These are the best models we have. These may not be absolute. If a being exists that can suspend these laws then great! We've just discovered a new branch of physics!
(25-04-2012 12:33 PM)Ghost Wrote:  A supernatural being could travel from one end of the universe to the other in an instant, travel backwards in time, destroy energy, destroy information, create something out of nothing, will something or someone into or out of existence, or know both the position and velocity of a particle simultaneously. They don't have to alter the laws to do this because the laws have no hold over them. They just do as they will and the universe just a keeps on truckin'.
I don't want to know what it can do. I want to know what it does do. That way, I can test it! Great!
(25-04-2012 12:33 PM)Ghost Wrote:  The only thing that would be measurable would be if a supernatural entity did something that corresponded to a natural law (like if God manifested itself as a person and walked from point A to point B). That would be measurable. But that would be a NATURAL PHENOMENON perpetrated by a supernatural entity. It would not be proof at all of the supernatural.
Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong! Do you understand that the CSI team can understand what happened at a murder scene without witnessing it? Murders impact the physical universe in ways that are testable by science. Anything that impacts the natural world in a measurable way is measurable, and that's the whole point of these invented beings. It's that they do impact the world in measurable ways. They heal the sick! They give to the poor! They punish the wicked! Great! So let's measure these effects!
(25-04-2012 12:33 PM)Ghost Wrote:  
Quote:A god that is capable of suspending the physics of the entire universe
to heal a child can still be detected by the improved health of that
child.
Absolutely not. BECAUSE of methodological naturalism.
Science will NOT EVEN CONSIDER the notion that the child's health was
improved by a "sky daddy". It will simply assume that there is some
material explanation for the improvement. THAT is the bias I have been trying to
point out from post one.
Even if a scientist DID ignore methodological naturalism and DID try to
measure it, they would have absolutely no tools whatsoever to conduct
those measurements. Empirical observation of the supernatural is
impossible. Without empirical data, science can say NOTHING.
Here is where you leave reality behind you. Science (theoretical physics in particular) is all about finding the places where our known physics may be incomplete and where we might peek into and understand other domains.
Science is all about testing whether a sky daddy can heal children. We can set up a control group an measure the health of that group against the group being prayed for. We can compare the health outcomes of a large group of religious people to that of a large group of nonreligious people. Like evidence at a crime scene any supernatural miracle will leave material evidence. Science doesn't assume a material explanation. It is most happy to verify a god claim based on the evidence that god leaves behind. Anyone who proposes a god answer to anomaly would have to prove the socks off their astounding claim, but the reason science keeps coming up with material explanations is not due to some blinkering or some flaw in the process.

It's because the evidence isn't there. It's because prayer doesn't work. It's because King Neptune doesn't live in the ocean. It's because animals evolved rather than being created. It's because the myths and legends we created were nothing more than myth and legend. Now it's time to move on. Now it's time to find out what aliens exist in our world, in our solar system, around distant stars, and outside of space time. Let's go do it! Science will lead the way.

(25-04-2012 12:33 PM)Ghost Wrote:  
Quote:Our universe has particular physics, and I think you are describing
things that comply with these physics as "natural". That's not the view
of naturalism, however, and that's a view that has no descriptive power
when it comes to what science can and can't analyse.
Naturalism posits that every single phenomenon in the universe has a material explanation. Materialism posits that the only two things that exist are matter and energy and that all phenomena in the universe are the result of the interaction of matter and energy. Natural laws are the forces in the universe that govern and limit material interactions. Methodological naturalism suggests, "Well we don't know if naturalism is true, but lets proceed AS IF it were true." Something that is natural is both material and governed by natural law. Something that is supernatural is above or beyond the natural, meaning it need not be material nor need it be governed by natural law.
I'm sorry that your out of your depth in this conversation. I'm sorry that you can't understand how supernatural actions can result in natural consequences. I'm sorry that you can't imagine the kind of universes that might exist outside of our own universe or the kinds of beings that might inhabit them. I'm sorry that you can't see our universe as anything but natural, and can't see it as anything but the totality of the natural order. I'm sorry that you feel the need to define supernatural beings in a such a way as to be indistinguishable from extra-spacetime aliens but at the same time indistinguishable from strings, or membranes, or birds, or the moon. I'm sorry that you know so little about science and so little about philosophy, and so little about naturalism. I'm sorry that you have not been properly schooled in these subjects. I encourage you to think seriously on the topic before replying again.

I'm more than happy to concede that there could be creatures that live outside of our spacetime, and even that these creatures might be able to suspend the physics of our universe. I don't want to argue that point. It's one I agree with. However, I would argue that none of the myths and legends we humans have come up with are in this class of creature. Every creature described by myth and legend interacts with the universe in measurable ways and either has been or can be disproved on the basis of these supposed properties of said creature.

Think particularly on this question before replying:
Can I think of and name a supernatural being of myth and legend (such as the god of the bible or some other identifiable power or deity) whose properties are consequential to the universe (such as answering prayer) but which leaves behind no material evidence that could be analysed statistically or by some other tool of science?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2012, 07:16 AM
RE: Hasn't god been disproved?
Eat shit, Hafnof. That was one of the most disgusting posts I've ever read anywhere. Not only are you astonishingly disrespectful but you didn't grasp a single thing I said and opted instead to blast me for things I wasn't saying and then had the fucking audacity to say that I was the one making a strawman argument. I have made a clear as day case and I'm sick of trying respectfully to repeat it when you have clearly demonstrated that you have neither the inclination nor the ability to comprehend it. You are truly a piece of shit and I have no further time for you. Fuck you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Ghost's post
26-04-2012, 07:50 AM
RE: Hasn't god been disproved?
Ladies... Dodgy

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2012, 10:12 AM
RE: Hasn't god been disproved?
Sooo..... Now that everyone in the room is uncomfortable, shall we start again? Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2012, 12:58 PM
RE: Hasn't god been disproved?
Yes god has been disproved. I disproved him or her in my imagination. My imaginary proof of this is laying on the imaginary table.
What's that ? You can't see my proof.

Well then, you'll have to take it on faith.

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
26-04-2012, 01:28 PM
RE: Hasn't god been disproved?
Question.

If it's so obvious that there is no God and if science doesn't have any limitations, then why hasn't science disproved God?

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2012, 03:20 PM
RE: Hasn't god been disproved?
Science doesn't try to disprove every crackpot idea that has floated through the nether regions of some peoples brains.

Science attempt to describe the how and why of what we observe, not what we invent in our imaginations or what we wish were true.

If there is a god or many gods or some ghostly apparition that flies through space and impregnates young girls through some, as of yet, unknown process, then it will be science that discovers it. Until then, when you find your lost keys, it's not god watching over you. When your plane arrives on time and safely at your destination, it's not god helping the plane to be more safe. When your child is born healthy, it's not god.

It's luck when find your keys and safety inspections, professional pilots with years of experience and lots of technical equipment that keep the plane safe and in the air. And when your child is born healthy, you can attribute that to genetics, health care guidelines and hospital staff in a country that prides itself on a very low death rate from child birth.

Attributing things to gods is bronze age thinking.
Do you really want people from the bronze age flying your plane ?
When they do, they often fly into buildings.

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
26-04-2012, 04:34 PM
RE: Hasn't god been disproved?
Hey, Rahn.

Your question is a little silly because I've never even hinted that I want Bronze Age people doing anything. I'm not attacking science. I don't want to do away with it.

That being said, you completely dodged the question. You can't tell me that no scientist has wanted to disprove God or the supernatural. There's legions of scientists that would love to. The question is, why haven't they? Because it's not worth their time is both a dodge and disingenuous.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2012, 07:23 PM
RE: Hasn't god been disproved?
For the same reason they haven't disproved Santa Claus or any other man made myths.
We see them for what they are. Apparently you do not.

I hope that Santa Claus remark I made didn't shatter any illusions you may have had.
You know he watches you when you sleep right ? All night long, he watches you.
That little itch you feel when you wake up in the middle of the night, it's not a spider, it's Santa.
You think about that.

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
26-04-2012, 07:52 PM
RE: Hasn't god been disproved?
Hey, Rahn.

You're exhibiting classic behaviour. It's quite fascinating really. I say something that threatens your world view and instead of answering the question honestly (or at all really), you attack me. Classic. Have fun with that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: