Help me dismantle the arguments on this meme.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-04-2016, 02:07 AM (This post was last modified: 28-04-2016 05:31 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: Help me dismantle the arguments on this meme.
(28-04-2016 02:02 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  1) Energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Which would mean that the universe has always existed. Why is an eternal universe any less plausible than an eternal creator?

If you can assume eternal, than a universe is more probable than a deity. An eternal universe requires less assumptions than an eternal universe creator.

Assuming a creator never actually answers the question at hand, it always pushes it further back and adds noting but more questions and unnecessary assumptions. It doesn't illuminate, it obfuscates.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like EvolutionKills's post
28-04-2016, 02:36 AM
RE: Help me dismantle the arguments on this meme.
Use this if ya' want. Short and sweet.

"Premise 1: Conclusion does not follow from premise. Universe may be eternal.

Premise 2: A law is an observation that appears to always be true, something that always applies under the same condition: It is not something that is necessarily true in all conditions. Thus Pasteur did not demonstrate, nore could he have, that it's impossible for life to emerge from non-life in any circumstance. Thus the conclusion that follows - that there must be eternal life from which other life is sourced - doesn't follow.

Premise 3: Equivocation fallacy: Code can mean any number of things. Also nobody 'discovered' that DNA is code: we just labeled it such.

The 'memes' conclusion doesn't follow from the premises."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2016, 03:26 AM
RE: Help me dismantle the arguments on this meme.
This is what I wrote:

1. The laws of thermodynamics have only been demonstrated to apply within the universe. We have no idea if our universe is enclosed or if there is anything outside it. There is no guarantee that the laws of thermodynamics would have applied before the existence of the universe.
The universe being eternal is a better explanation than a god. It requires drastically fewer assumptions. But that's not true.
2. Wow! What a dishonest argument! Biogenesis only refers to reproduction, NOT ORIGINS. There is an entire other discipline called ABIOGENESIS that is the study of the origin of living material..... Lawrence Krauss (a renowned physicist) has provided some very good empirical support for life arising from non-living material, albeit this is a very fledgling endeavor.
3. An "eternal, life-giving source"? How about Zeus?
4. DNA is NOT A CODE!!! This is an equivocation fallacy. DNA is a causal chemical reaction, nothing more. It is not information in the sense of written language. The "code" part of it was fabricated by humans to describe the chemical reactions in the DNA proteins to layman people in colloquial terms. It is NOT information. The little string models they show you in science class is not what DNA looks like in real life. That model was put together by scientists to make sense of the various causal chemical interactions.
5. You can use these pseudo-scientific arguments to argue for the existence of any magical being, such as ghosts, fairies, leprechauns, unicorns, loch ness monsters, etc. We are aware that there are many unanswered questions in the universe. The atheist is just someone who is intellectually honest enough to admit he/she doesn't know the answers. When you propose a god is responsible for it all, you are essentially attempting to solve a mystery with a bigger mystery. It raises more questions than it answers. It is also intellectually lazy because it prevents you from trying to find what the real answers are. When you have an ancient book that tells you everything, and you think you know it all, then there's no reason to use your brain in pursuit of the real answers. I agree that these are questions that demand answers. But when you try to plug "God" into these gaps in human understanding to answer these big questions, you only think you are solving the problem. But you are just using a panacea. "God" has no explanatory power for anything until you have provided empirical evidence that such a being exists. Ancient books, appeals to emotion, faith, and personal experience do not count as sufficient evidence.
6. I am an atheist because there came a point in my life when I decided to start actually caring about whether or not my beliefs were true, rather than whether or not they made me feel good to believe. When you do your due diligence, study logic/rhetoric, science, philosophy, history, and critically examine religious doctrines like the bible, it is so easy to see these religions for what they really are- Ancient nonsense created by primitive, ignorant desert tribal people in pre-scientific times when people had literally no rational understanding of the world and how it works. These are the type of ancient barbarians who wrote the bible, and the stories of the bible reflect their ignorance and immorality.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Tamiptump's post
28-04-2016, 03:31 AM
RE: Help me dismantle the arguments on this meme.
Perhaps I made some factual errors in my DNA explanation. Good thing I haven't sent it yet! Lol
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2016, 04:03 AM
RE: Help me dismantle the arguments on this meme.
Atheism: Because all deities have failed to meet their burden of proof.

Ignosticism: Because nobody can seem to define their god concept in a meaningful (i.e. falsifiable) way.


Until someone can define a god concept in a meaningful (i.e. falsifiable) way, and provide evidence in support of it's existence, atheism (i.e. rejection of the claim) is the reasonable conclusion.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2016, 04:28 AM
RE: Help me dismantle the arguments on this meme.
(28-04-2016 03:31 AM)Tamiptump Wrote:  Perhaps I made some factual errors in my DNA explanation. Good thing I haven't sent it yet! Lol

Overall I like the rebuttel, except the caps lock followed by a bunch of exclamation marks. Perhaps you also want to explain to him definitively why that is an equivocation fallacy. Because really the whole point relied on that fallacy, so it is most pertinent to demonstrate the lapses in its logic.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Gilgamesh's post
28-04-2016, 05:28 AM
RE: Help me dismantle the arguments on this meme.
(28-04-2016 12:31 AM)Tamiptump Wrote:  Someone just give me something cleaver to say to him so he will fuck off. I'm terrible with formulating good arguments.

I did not make any of these images. All of them were gathered from various places around the 'net, maybe even here.

[Image: Kermit_JD_zpsdtieepze.jpg]

[Image: uB4FyJ9_zpschxwvg54.jpg]

[Image: e94ab72bd7d6085010d20360b91ff8b6_zpsrjcv83ee.jpg]

[Image: HYYxZlf_zps1drrgqki.jpg]

[Image: resized_jesus-says-meme-generator-jesus-...pxwhab.jpg]

[Image: FB_IMG_1444769096355_zpskaqhr3uf.jpg]

[Image: PFb0Mmu_zpsy54lilaw.jpg]

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Fatbaldhobbit's post
28-04-2016, 05:43 AM
RE: Help me dismantle the arguments on this meme.
(27-04-2016 11:05 PM)Tamiptump Wrote:  I have a stubborn Christian friend who won't quit sending me these memes. I need the help of some of the more knowledgable people here to help me destroy these arguments.

I have a former friend that did this passive aggressive BS to me, that's why they're a FORMER friend.

Thinking back on it, I should have called him out on this passive aggressive behavior and explained to him how to respect boundaries.

This isn't really about refuting his stupid memes, memes are thoughtless jeers thrown at you disregarding your personal boundaries.

That's what the issue is really about, this person is not respecting personal boundaries and they need to be called out on it and it needs to be explained to them why this is unacceptable behavior.

If they want to have an honest conversation about questioning religion, then that's a good conversation to have, if they just want to toss drive-by memes and jeer, then that's not much of a friend.

This is a good article about this:

Christianity Has a Major Boundary Problem

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheInquisition's post
28-04-2016, 05:46 AM
RE: Help me dismantle the arguments on this meme.
Fact: As the universe expands, the space of the universe is increasing.

Hypothesis (by Krauss et al): Dark energy seems to exist. It is currently the best scientific explanation for some observations (like accelerated expansion of the universe). It is currently best explained as the (vacuum) energy of empty space. It is estimated that the universe is ca. 75% vacuum energy of empty space.

Empty space is increasing, ergo the energy within the universe is increasing. Thats why its accelerating. You need energy to accelerate something. 75% of the universe is energy that wasnt part of the universe at the time of the big bang(?).

Ergo: The 1st law of thermodynamics doesnt necessarily apply to the universe. Smartass

However this is currently only a th...erm Hypothesis. We do not have (yet!) a complete mathematical and physical framework (theory)!

P.S.: please someone correct me if im talking nonsense. Blush

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2016, 08:28 AM
RE: Help me dismantle the arguments on this meme.
(28-04-2016 12:31 AM)Tamiptump Wrote:  Someone just give me something cleaver to say to him so he will fuck off. I'm terrible with formulating good arguments.

If what he says is true, then he needs no faith.
He/she is the FIRST theist EVER, who claims they *know* about a god, yet needs no faith. St. Paul says faith was a gift of the Spirit.

Pretty amazing he/she thinks they are above that. Jesus said "No one shall come to me, unless the Father draw him" .... pretty amazing your friend thinks they are special, and above what Jesus said.

All the laws he/she cites are INTERNAL and apply to what we know about THIS universe. We know NOTHING about what applies to what may have been external to, or apart from, or "other than" this universe. Not one of them can be said to apply.

So .... 3 clevernesses. Snort.
Gimme a damn prize already. Big Grin Tongue Facepalm Weeping

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: