"Show me scientific facts on your disbelief in all Gods".
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-02-2014, 01:24 AM
RE: "Show me scientific facts on your disbelief in all Gods".
(06-02-2014 01:15 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  
(06-02-2014 01:09 AM)evenheathen Wrote:  You have a citation for this? I've never heard anyone claim that something created itself from nothing. Should we define nothing?

Many atheists posit that existence was caused by the spontaneous generation of matter which was catalyst for the singularity. You brought up nothing, not me.

True, I did, as I feel this is where the conversation will lead. Just trying to cut to the heart of the "matter". Laughat

This is why I am prompting you to define your terms. The "spontaneous generation of matter" is evidenced by the discovery of the Higgs Boson, as far as the natural state of the universe is concerned. It's not well understood, but the fact that it's been predicted and narrowed down that far is pretty impressive if you ask me.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2014, 01:41 AM (This post was last modified: 06-02-2014 02:24 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: "Show me scientific facts on your disbelief in all Gods".
(06-02-2014 12:56 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  
(06-02-2014 12:01 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Sounds like you're assuming that nature can be created.

Unless there is some justification that nature cannot be created, why should I accept this unless I've already reached naturalism as a conclusion?

Is here some justification that nature can be created? Why should I accept this unless I've already reached naturalism is not a conclusion?

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2014, 01:43 AM
RE: "Show me scientific facts on your disbelief in all Gods".
(06-02-2014 01:24 AM)evenheathen Wrote:  
(06-02-2014 01:15 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  Many atheists posit that existence was caused by the spontaneous generation of matter which was catalyst for the singularity. You brought up nothing, not me.

True, I did, as I feel this is where the conversation will lead. Just trying to cut to the heart of the "matter". Laughat

This is why I am prompting you to define your terms. The "spontaneous generation of matter" is evidenced by the discovery of the Higgs Boson, as far as the natural state of the universe is concerned. It's not well understood, but the fact that it's been predicted and narrowed down that far is pretty impressive if you ask me.

What terms do you want me to define? I haven't placed the spontaneous creation of matter due to what was happening at Cern. Happy to be showed otherwise.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2014, 01:49 AM
RE: "Show me scientific facts on your disbelief in all Gods".
(06-02-2014 01:09 AM)Youkay Wrote:  Do you dimiss Krauss' theory? If so, why?

To be fair, I do not understand Krauss' theory fully. Actually, only the principals. And I am in no position to argue against it or for it. All I know is some quantum physics. Therefore I would be interested to hear your criticizm, if you have any. It would be a good opportunity for myself as well.

I dismiss his theory due to his obvious bias, lack of scientific support, and book publishing benefits on the back of Dawkins.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2014, 01:50 AM (This post was last modified: 06-02-2014 02:02 AM by Youkay.)
RE: "Show me scientific facts on your disbelief in all Gods".
How do you discern his "obvious bias"? What is he biased towards?

Why do you think the presented argument lacks for "scientific support"? His hypothesis agrees with experimental observations of the universe.

And the last thing you said is just silly. Both Lawrence Krauss and Richard Dawkins are such famous and decorated men. It would be ridiculous to assume something like that. But let us ignore that.

Fun "paradox": The higher the selection pressure, the slower evolution takes place.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2014, 02:11 AM
RE: "Show me scientific facts on your disbelief in all Gods".
(06-02-2014 01:50 AM)Youkay Wrote:  How do you discern his "obvious bias"? What is he biased towards?

Why do you think the presented argument lacks for "scientific support"? His hypothesis agrees with experimental observations of the universe.

And the last thing you said is just silly. Both Lawrence Krauss and Richard Dawkins are such famous and decorated men. It would be ridiculous to assume something like that. But let us ignore that.

Both him and Dawkins are anti-theist.

His hypothesis is not supported by other scientists in his field.

And his version of nothing is not nothing, and is conjecture about the big bang. That said he's making money, as is Dawkins. Both are scientists and should remain in that sphere. Their version of philosophy is terrible.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2014, 02:13 AM
RE: "Show me scientific facts on your disbelief in all Gods".
OK, you have proven that you are arguing from a point of utter ignorance. The number of fallacies that you have commited in our very short exchange is shocking... Nothing to be gained here.

Fun "paradox": The higher the selection pressure, the slower evolution takes place.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2014, 02:20 AM
RE: "Show me scientific facts on your disbelief in all Gods".
(06-02-2014 02:13 AM)Youkay Wrote:  OK, you have proven that you are arguing from a point of utter ignorance. The number of fallacies that you have commited in our very short exchange is shocking... Nothing to be gained here.

I would be interested to hear what fallacies I've said, and what is ignorant about what I've said.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2014, 02:56 AM
RE: "Show me scientific facts on your disbelief in all Gods".
*sigh*.... OK. I don't want to, but let me tell you why you have proven yourself to be so very ignorant:

You dismissed a hypthesis because you don't like the author (he is anti-theist, he wants to make money, blablabla). That is called ad hominem.

You say that other scientists don't support him. That is called appeal to authority. And you said that in response to "His hypothesis agrees with experimental observations of the universe." *massive face-palm*

Fun "paradox": The higher the selection pressure, the slower evolution takes place.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2014, 03:23 AM
RE: "Show me scientific facts on your disbelief in all Gods".
(06-02-2014 02:56 AM)Youkay Wrote:  *sigh*.... OK. I don't want to, but let me tell you why you have proven yourself to be so very ignorant:

You dismissed a hypthesis because you don't like the author (he is anti-theist, he wants to make money, blablabla). That is called ad hominem.

You say that other scientists don't support him. That is called appeal to authority. And you said that in response to "His hypothesis agrees with experimental observations of the universe." *massive face-palm*

Sigh indeed, I was hoping for more.

I have proven myself to be ignorant to you, your perception of me does not concern me. I have seen Dawkins and Krauss talking and debating, they are strongly anti-theist and you can't deny they make money and a living off of the "atheist circuit".

Science tends to strive for consensus. Is this where you cite Galileo to 'prove' your point? His hypothesis lacks substance and I would propose his books are aimed at the atheistic, not the scientific market.

By all means, keep conflating scientists with atheists to prove atheism to be correct.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: