Sand Castles and bowling ball?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-03-2010, 04:07 PM
 
RE: Sand Castles and bowling ball?
(13-03-2010 03:54 PM)ashley.hunt60 Wrote:  
(13-03-2010 12:22 PM)martinb59 Wrote:  If you were walking on a beach, by yourself and nobody was around, and you found a large ornate sand castle, would your first thought be "Wow isn't that amazing the way the wind blew the sand in that pattern and the moisture in the air helped to hold the sand together, chance is a beautiful thing" Or would you say "someone is really talented at sculpting" I ride dirt bikes in the desert, and frequently we will be 20 miles from anything and we will find something, last week we found bowling pins and a bowling ball. I don't "wow amazing way those atoms formed out here in the desert" No I think someone brought them here. To walk around this earth and look at what is around you and say that it came from chance, is really a leap of faith.

I firmly believe that if God created evolution and atheist believed in creationism (I know totally stupid comment) that the atheist would laugh the evolutionist out of the water.

Blind watch maker argument I see. We see sand castles made by humans, and humans only. We have never seen a sand castle come from nature, and we have no idea how a sand castle would come from nature.

Humans, animals, plants, these things we see come from nature, and we know they could have come from nature, with no divine intervention needed. What is more, is that we have evidence to support our theories of how they came to be.

So here is the logic process. We have seen sandcastles made my humans, and humans only. We see a sand castle, we know humans exist, and have the ability to make sand castles, and are the only things that can make sand castles. So we have decent reason to believe a human made a sand castle.

We have not seen a good, or how life started. Although we see life, we don't have evidence for god. We do not have enough evidence to suspect that life most likely came from god.

We have evidence to suspect that life can be formed from non-organic chemicals. We have very strong evidence to believe that life diversifies. Significantly more evidence than any other idea. Enough evidence to even take it as fact.

And of course, the big difference between a sandcastle and a cat; cats have babies, sand castles don't. In regards to the creation-evolution switch, setting aside the basic logic flaws, I would go with whichever provided more compelling evidence, provided that at least one has compelling evidence. If neither were possible, I would reject both. So, if creation had evidence, and evolution didn't, I would be a creationist.

Little fun fact to throw in, some atheists believe that aliens created life, and thus are both creationists and atheists.

Also a nice job, let's change sand castles then for this
http://www.teamsandtastic.com/RockStacking/

Again I know it is stupid, but I am asking for honesty, not logical flaws, so dig deep into your heart. If God created evolution and so theists believed in evolution (I know there are theistic evolutionists, not what I am talking about) and atheists believed in creationism as it stands now, whould you be a theist or an atheist?    
Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2010, 04:13 PM
RE: Sand Castles and bowling ball?
Is this a picture of something man-made or naturally occurring?

"Sometimes it is better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness."
- Terry Pratchett
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2010, 04:18 PM
 
RE: Sand Castles and bowling ball?
(13-03-2010 04:13 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Is this a picture of something man-made or naturally occurring?

http://www.teamsandtastic.com/RockStacking/

There is the site, if you came across any of them would you think that chance put those rocks there?
Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2010, 04:22 PM (This post was last modified: 13-03-2010 04:50 PM by ashley.hunt60.)
RE: Sand Castles and bowling ball?
(13-03-2010 04:07 PM)martinb59 Wrote:  Also a nice job, let's change sand castles then for this

Wow, that is impressive.

But still not evidence of god. I have seen people stack rocks like that before(Although not in the middle of a lake), so I know a human can do that. But the big thing here is that, humans exist, we have proof. We don't have proof of god.

So, going back to the logic process. I see rocks stacked. Humans exist. I have seen human stack rocks. A human could have stacked the rocks. No other sufficient explanation. Sufficient to believe a human did it.

As to how they did it, no idea. I have no decent guess on how to go about that, although some ideas. But there is an important point to be had in agnosticism. Don't always believe the most plausible thing just because there is no other explanation. If I was able to deduce that humans could not have stacked the rocks, and I was left with god or chance, I would pick neither. I would hold no belief as to how the structure could have arisen, and that is okay. The complexity of something, combined with the lack of knowledge of it, doesn't equal god. It equals, "We don't know".

I don't believe Jesus is the son of God until I see the long form birth certificate!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2010, 04:24 PM
RE: Sand Castles and bowling ball?
(13-03-2010 04:18 PM)martinb59 Wrote:  
(13-03-2010 04:13 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Is this a picture of something man-made or naturally occurring?

http://www.teamsandtastic.com/RockStacking/

Okay, man-made then.

Quote:There is the site, if you came across any of them would you think that chance put those rocks there?

No, because that combination of rocks isn't naturally occurring, except in ridiculously convoluted theoretical situations. However, this still isn't evidence for your god, as the universe as it is is entirely accounted for by natural laws. There's no need for a designer.

"Sometimes it is better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness."
- Terry Pratchett
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2010, 04:24 PM
 
RE: Sand Castles and bowling ball?
(13-03-2010 04:18 PM)martinb59 Wrote:  
(13-03-2010 04:13 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Is this a picture of something man-made or naturally occurring?

http://www.teamsandtastic.com/RockStacking/

There is the site, if you came across any of them would you think that chance put those rocks there?

My counter argument...

[Image: 16226.jpg]

Martin, would YOU say that chance made the rock formations in the picture above?

http://www.arizona.worldweb.com/Photos/C...-2905.html

Or the Chinle Formation in Arizona as well:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinle_Formation

[Image: Chinle_Badlands.jpg]
Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2010, 04:52 PM
 
RE: Sand Castles and bowling ball?
(13-03-2010 04:24 PM)supermanlives1973 Wrote:  
(13-03-2010 04:18 PM)martinb59 Wrote:  
(13-03-2010 04:13 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Is this a picture of something man-made or naturally occurring?

http://www.teamsandtastic.com/RockStacking/

There is the site, if you came across any of them would you think that chance put those rocks there?

My counter argument...

[Image: 16226.jpg]

Martin, would YOU say that chance made the rock formations in the picture above?

http://www.arizona.worldweb.com/Photos/C...-2905.html

Or the Chinle Formation in Arizona as well:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinle_Formation

[Image: Chinle_Badlands.jpg]

I have never seen the first one, it could be natural, it could be man made, but I know your point, I think. I live in Coto de Caza California, it rained at my house this year according to dorky rain gauge about 15 inches, I can see the result of water coming off a hill and making random crevices in my yard and If didn't fix them next year they would get deeper and deeper. So yes it was chance if you mean random patterns in the ground.
(13-03-2010 12:59 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(13-03-2010 12:22 PM)martinb59 Wrote:  If you were walking on a beach, by yourself and nobody was around, and you found a large ornate sand castle, would your first thought be "Wow isn't that amazing the way the wind blew the sand in that pattern and the moisture in the air helped to hold the sand together, chance is a beautiful thing" Or would you say "someone is really talented at sculpting" I ride dirt bikes in the desert, and frequently we will be 20 miles from anything and we will find something, last week we found bowling pins and a bowling ball. I don't "wow amazing way those atoms formed out here in the desert" No I think someone brought them here. To walk around this earth and look at what is around you and say that it came from chance, is really a leap of faith.

There are a few problems with this.
The first is that, yes, it is technically possible for a sand castle to form naturally. It's incredibly unlikely, but over billions of words and billions of beaches with billions of winds stirring the sand over billions of years, it will eventually happen.
Then there's the same problem with the Kalam Cosmological argument: the universe cannot have had a cause, because outside of the universe there is no time and therefore no causality.
Then there's the fact that the things you are (probably) trying to make this analogy about - evolution, abiogenesis, the formation of planets and stars, et cetera - are all explained very easily through known natural processes.
(13-03-2010 12:50 PM)martinb59 Wrote:  you're a vet prove God doesn't exist based on YOUR experience with the animal body

Burden of proof fallacy.

Quote:What if atheists believed in creationism and theists believed evolution, would you believe in God then?

This is the same thing you objected to in the thread about the Heavy Rock Paradox. It's the fallacy of contradictory premises. "Creation" is, by definition, creation of the universe by a god. Atheists, by definition, do not believe in a god, and so cannot believe in creation.

My question was what would think? You are telling me then when you walked up to that you would think, it was the product of chance.

Show me how I committed burden of proof so I can learn.

I am going to watch my tongue, but to summarize the Kalam argument the way way did shows your inexperience and lack of depth, no matter what side you believe the argument is way more complex than you or I are capable of discussing and therefore I would argue a waste of time. When you can answer Cantorian set theory, transfinite arithmetic, the ontological status of sets, the nature of time as tensed or tenseless, Zeno's Paradoxes, Kant's First Antinomy, not just that but Kant said " that by understanding the sources and limits of human knowledge we can ask fruitful metaphysical questions. He asked if an object can be known to have certain properties prior to the experience of that object. He concluded that all objects about which the mind can think must conform to its manner of thought. Therefore if the mind can think only in terms of causality", How about an infinite past, not possible, contemporary Big Bang cosmology (including critiques of alternative or non-standard cosmological theories such as the Steady State model, the Oscillating model, the Vacuum Fluctuation model, and Quantum Gravity models), thermodynamics and physical eschatology and that is to just discuss premise 1, then you can talk, because I won't be able to. Do a little looking, a number of your skeptics/atheists don't dispute the truth of the first two premises, and even though I am pulling the AGE card, I doubt you have done that in the short time you have been doing this.

You don't have to put your own original thoughts into your posts or replies to me like others are doing, I am encouraging you, as the "Old Fart" to think for yourself respond. There is a cliche about some Christians that "They are so heavenly minded that they are no earthly good" Same with skeptics, in way. There is more to life and thought and experience than that.


Attached File(s) Thumbnail(s)
   
Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2010, 05:04 PM
RE: Sand Castles and bowling ball?
I thought of opening a new thread, but I think this thread is fine to the things I want to write.

my biology teacher last year, a religious man (yeah, yeah-I was surprised to see him with a Kippa on the first time too), told me one time he doesn't think creation and evolution is contradicting each other-they are compliting each other.
The evolution is the way god created things. He created the world and then created the living with evolution.
Personally, I think it's another way to "prove" god made it look like 4.5 billion years is the age of the earth, but the "truth" is 6000 years.

martin-looking forward to your answer.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2010, 05:18 PM
RE: Sand Castles and bowling ball?
(13-03-2010 04:52 PM)martinb59 Wrote:  My question was what would think? You are telling me then when you walked up to that you would think, it was the product of chance.

Not in all situations, no. But my point is that the things which you are comparing the sand castle to can very well have arisen through entirely natural means.

Quote:Show me how I committed burden of proof so I can learn.

You asked him to disprove the existence of God. This is the burden of proof fallacy; you must prove that he exists.

Quote:I am going to watch my tongue, but to summarize the Kalam argument the way way did shows your inexperience and lack of depth, no matter what side you believe the argument is way more complex than you or I are capable of discussing and therefore I would argue a waste of time.

Then explain how it was incorrect.

Quote:When you can answer Cantorian set theory, transfinite arithmetic, the ontological status of sets, the nature of time as tensed or tenseless, Zeno's Paradoxes, Kant's First Antinomy, not just that but Kant said " that by understanding the sources and limits of human knowledge we can ask fruitful metaphysical questions.

Show how these are relevant before you claim that I need to know them.

Quote:Therefore if the mind can think only in terms of causality", How about an infinite past, not possible, contemporary Big Bang cosmology (including critiques of alternative or non-standard cosmological theories such as the Steady State model, the Oscillating model, the Vacuum Fluctuation model, and Quantum Gravity models), thermodynamics and physical eschatology and that is to just discuss premise 1

When did I ever say that I supported an infinite past idea? I specifically stated that I didn't.

Quote:Do a little looking, a number of your skeptics/atheists don't dispute the truth of the first two premises

Bollocks. I have been all over the internet and nearly every atheist disputes those two premises.

Quote:and even though I am pulling the AGE card, I doubt you have done that in the short time you have been doing this.

Ad hominem, duly ignored.

Quote:You don't have to put your own original thoughts into your posts or replies to me like others are doing

Again, show how my posts are not my own thoughts. What's that? You can't? That's right. I thought so.

"Sometimes it is better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness."
- Terry Pratchett
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2010, 12:08 AM
 
RE: Sand Castles and bowling ball?
(13-03-2010 05:04 PM)shiranl Wrote:  I thought of opening a new thread, but I think this thread is fine to the things I want to write.

my biology teacher last year, a religious man (yeah, yeah-I was surprised to see him with a Kippa on the first time too), told me one time he doesn't think creation and evolution is contradicting each other-they are compliting each other.
The evolution is the way god created things. He created the world and then created the living with evolution.
Personally, I think it's another way to "prove" god made it look like 4.5 billion years is the age of the earth, but the "truth" is 6000 years.

martin-looking forward to your answer.

I think what you are talking about is a theistic evolutionist, it is their way of getting over the problem that "out of nothing nothing comes". That God created evolution.

I think there may be a language barrier here, but I will do my best. There are people who believe in the Bible and believe the earth is between 6000 and 10000 years old. When asked how they could believe that knowing that light from stars would take millions of years to get here, they say that Jesus turned water into wine which is an aged beverage, just like God created the earth to be aged. I don't believe in macroevolution or macro evolution however you want to spell it, I do believe in microevolution.
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: