"There had to have been something"
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-06-2012, 02:37 PM (This post was last modified: 12-06-2012 03:05 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: "There had to have been something"
Good going pppgggr !

Couple things. The "nothingness", which you imagine, is not observed, (anywhere), in this universe. We don't know what may or may not exist in others. So at the very most, theists must remain silent, as every statement they make, is refutable. The "magical thinking" attempt to shoot you down is just another same ole, same ole theistic attempt to say that the universe is intuitively logical, which has been proven to not be the case. At the Big Bang, there were equal amounts of matter and anti-matter, (still "0"), and today, the total energy of the universe is STILL "0", (gravity can have a negative value). So first they have to prove there is "something". They can't. It's still "0". There still is "nothing". Secondly, the above statement assumes the universe is logical, or that a system of thought which human brains consider "logical" accurately describes the nature of the universe. He presumes the "rules", without proof. There is a lot of proof that what we perceive as logical does NOT describe reality. The assumption that he makes, is that "the way our minds conceive things" is the way ultimately arguments "succeed". Again, proven to be false.

"Is", "always been" "eternal", require spaceTIME. They are meaningless words, if the dimension of time, (and we know in THIS universe, it's spacetime), does not exist a priori, (and for a creator to "act" also requires time, in which to act). Again they are silenced. They cannot define "being", "existence" or any property of a god without using a term which requires time. So, pppgggr, your 13 year old concept is closer to reality, then his. He can't even define the boundary between logic, and "magical thinking", and why that boundary should deserve respect. A world where one accepts the lesser magical of the magicals is sorry indeed, especially when one can't even define the word. (It's about Lingusitics, kid).

They keep asserting, with no proof that "there is room for one". In fact they have not demonstrated infinite regression is not possible. The room could be very crowded. If the being is "perfect" why is it's creation flawed ? Fail. Logic fails. He just doesn't know why, and where. The "contingent" thing is just another god of the gaps. Human brains don' like gaps.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-06-2012, 03:09 PM
 
RE: "There had to have been something"
(12-06-2012 02:37 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Good going pppgggr !

Couple things. The "nothingness", which you imagine, is not observed, (anywhere), in this universe. We don't know what may or may not exist in others. So at the very most, theists must remain silent, as every statement they make, is refutable. The "magical thinking" attempt to shoot you down is just another same ole, same ole theistic attempt to say that the universe is intuitively logical, which has been proven to not be the case.

If it's not intuitively logical, then we would have to think about it magically or psychotically, which is exactly what thinking things pop into existence out of nothing is. So, I don't think it's been proven that the universe is not logical. The fact is, there's no other way to look at it, unless you're going to abandon all notions of science and reason.

Quote:At the Big Bang, there were equal amounts of matter and anti-matter, (still "0"), and today, the total energy of the universe is STILL "0", (gravity can have a negative value). So first they have to prove there is "something". They can't. It's still "0". There still is "nothing".

Oh...I see. I'm wrong about God because what I just don't seem to get is that there is nothing in existence. Brilliant. Hobo

Quote: Secondly, the above statement assumes the universe is logical, or that a system of thought which human brains consider "logical" accurately describes the nature of the universe. He presumes the "rules", without proof. There is a lot of proof that what we perceive as logical does NOT describe reality. The assumption that he makes, is that "the way our minds conceive things" is the way ultimately arguments "succeed". Again, proven to be false.

Fine. I'll grant you that...ludicrous...assumption and say that our minds don't think correctly about the universe. Then we might as well stop trying to figure it out. There's no point in talking about atheism or theism. We might as well simply exist like the animals. Is that where your atheism has led you?

Quote:"Is", "always been" "eternal", require spaceTIME. They are meaningless words, if the dimension of time, (and we know in THIS universe, it's spacetime), does not exist a priori, (and for a creator to "act" also requires time, in which to act). Again they are silenced. They cannot define "being", "existence" or any property of a god without using a term which requires time.

Consciousness does not require time. Time is an illusion anyway. There is no past; there is no future, there never has been. There is only an eternal present moment. So, here you think time is a real thing and it's not--it never has been. Time compared to what? The univers starts expanding and how exactly do you measure that time? You can't. "Eternal" is the real state of things. That should be obvious to you.


Quote:So, pppgggr, your 13 year old concept is closer to reality, then his. He can't
even define the boundary between logic, and "magical thinking", and why that
boundary should deserve respect. A world where one accepts the lesser magical of
the magicals is sorry indeed, especially when one can't even define the word.
Attributing an eternal existence to one and only one perfect being is not magical thinking. It is simply a logical conclusion. And if it is wrong, and if a contingent universe simple started to exist for no reason at all, then there is no rhyme or reason to anything and ultimately no way to predict anything--no science, no philosophy. And our conversation about it all is then pointless.

Quote:They keep asserting, with no proof that "there is room for one". In fact they have not demonstrated infinite regression is not possible. The room could be very crowded. If the being is "perfect" why is it's creation flawed ? Fail. Logic fails. He just doesn't know why, and where. The "contingent" thing is just another god of the gaps.

You're arguing for insanity. You do realize that don't you? And like all insane people, you think you're right, you think your delusions are truth and your paranoia is justified. But here's the thing, if you're right then the universe is an ultimately insane place. Our minds function with sanity, not with insanity.
Quote this message in a reply
12-06-2012, 04:14 PM (This post was last modified: 13-06-2012 06:12 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: "There had to have been something"
No.
Relativity, a Dirac Spinner, and Uncertainty ARE non-intuitive, and have been proven. Some brain's categories are simply too limited, and things they cannot comprehend, they label "insanity", (without defining the word). Said Poster has not defined "something", and "nothing", and assumed his god makes sense, because he is unable to do the definition. As usual, the theist goes down the "animal" path, (dualism), as he is completely unable to think beyond that boundary, (AND all the premises are false). (San O and I did our shift today at the food bank.) Scientists who KNOW the universe may not be intuitive are very busy. Busy today. His statements that consciousness not requiring time, are hollow, and unproven. THE only evidence we have, is that it does, and arises from complex chemical reactions. Assertions are just assertions. Not proof. "Time is an illusion". Yeah right. He was born. He will die. How very illusory. More tripe crap. The universe expanding, (T2) is compared, to (any), (T1). The fact of the expansion proves something has changed. If "eternal" is the real nature of the universe, your breakfast will serve as your supper. Now get to bed. The universe does not require a purpose, because the brain demands one of it. I will decide what's pointless, pops. No one else. The fact that some are depressive personalities ain't everybody else's problem. Said can't even define "sanity". First he asserts that what he observes is proof of his god. Then he asserts that what he observes is false, (illusion). THAT is insanity.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
12-06-2012, 10:56 PM
 
RE: "There had to have been something"
(12-06-2012 04:14 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  No.
Relativity, a Dirac Spinner, and Uncertainty ARE non-intuitive, and have been proven. Some brain's categories are simply too limited, and things they cannot comprehend, they label "insanity", (without defining the word). Said Poster has not defined "something", and "nothing", and assumed his god makes sense, because he is unable to do the definition. As usual, the theist goes down the "animal" path, (dualism), as he is completely unable to think beyond that boundary, (AND all the premises are false). (San O and I did our shift today at the food bank.) Scientists who KNOW the universe may not be intuitive are very busy. Busy today. His statements that consciousness not requiring time, are hollow, and unproven. THE only evidence we have, is that it does, and arises from complex chemical reactions. Assertions are just assertions. Not proof. "Time is an illusion". Yeah right. He was born. He will die. How very illusory. More tripe crap. The universe expanding, (T2) is compared, to (any), (T1). The fact of the expansion proves something has changed. If "eternal" is the real nature of the universe, your breakfast will serve as your supper. Now get to bed. The universe does not require a purpose, because the brain demands one of it. I will decide what's pointless, pops. No one else. The fact that some are depressive personalities ain't everybody else's problem. Said can't even define "sanity". First he asserts that what he observes is proof of his god. Then he asserts that what he observes is false, (illusion). THAT is insanity.

Sorry. Didn't realize I was dealing with someone who would get all agitated when engaged in conversation. Go back to wearing your tin foil hat and pushing your shopping cart. I won't bother you anymore, except to say that you remind me of someone when you keep calling me "Said."



Quote this message in a reply
13-06-2012, 03:38 AM (This post was last modified: 13-06-2012 06:16 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: "There had to have been something"
See what happens. Everyone kept saying something had changed. Nothing has changed. Some of us were skeptical. Just as in the very first post, when cornered, he :


a. starts doing the "calm down man" thing, (even though, there is not a shred of evidence that anyone is upset), nor has it ever been stated why a passionate response, (even though one has not actually been given yet), would be a bad thing ....

b. is completely incapable of answering the points presented.

It's called deflection. It's very obvious.

The question at hand, which has never been addressed, is how consciousness could exist without spacetime. If there were no movement, (from T1 to T2), then whatever is, however briefly, (nanosecond, picosecond, "momentarily") in whatever is "present" "in front" of a consciousness, then whatever he is talking about, (as Dawkins says), is NOT what everyone else says when they use that word. If there is no movement, there is no awareness, or conclusion, or thought process, or anything else. Consciousness cannot be static, and exist only in T1. Without T2, it's meaningless. A process requires (space)time.

Since he's accused me of the "upset" thing before, and used the tin hat thing before, he seems to have a fairly poor memory, ("I didn't realize") He remains utterly, completely self-centered. ("I'm dealing with" ...) Some will just never get it. It is not now, nor ever will be about "him".

My audience with Pope Egor is now over. I want my money back.
(Whispering/mumbling to the Swiss guard at door of the Apostolic Palace) : Dude, it's really humorous, that a 13 year old exhibits more thoughtful maturity than His Pompous Holiness.


Prophesy : Buckaneer 6:66 "Yeah wherefore, I declare unto thee, this day, yet before this day is out, ye shall be placed thereby wherefore unto the sacred burning fires of "ignore", for all eternity. Amen. Alleluia."

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
13-06-2012, 03:51 AM
RE: "There had to have been something"
In all honesty, I'm having issues understanding what Egor had put forth, and somewhat Bucky Ball, yet I understand him a bit more. I've tried several times to hop back into the conversation, but everything I tried typing seemed completely wrong, to either of the sides. I'm just going to admit that I'm having issues making sense of these concepts and leave it at that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-06-2012, 03:54 AM
RE: "There had to have been something"
(13-06-2012 03:51 AM)pppgggr Wrote:  In all honesty, I'm having issues understanding what Egor had put forth, and somewhat Bucky Ball, yet I understand him a bit more. I've tried several times to hop back into the conversation, but everything I tried typing seemed completely wrong, to either of the sides.
Buddy... In time you will have the expertise and the confidence to type whatever you want... Trying to enter into a discussion with Bucky and Egor is tough... I have been lurking for quite a while checking the stuff that has been said. ( It's what I do.) trust me, our time will come.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-06-2012, 05:05 AM
RE: "There had to have been something"
Why? Why did there have to be something? Because you can’t get something from nothing?
Didn’t one of the clever boffins get matter from energy in the magic roundabout that is the LHC?
I’ll have to concede that energy is something, but all things are energy so is it just a change of states? A shift in perspective?
Can you get nothing from something? When the universe collapses in a few (trillion) weeks time will there be nothing?
If the universe exists between two states of matter and anti-matter and all things are zero can we now look at that and conclude that just like us, existence is fleeting and time is also perspective?
And just because we might not have the answer to it (yet), it is not evidence for god.
I might not know how they get jam into donuts but I highly doubt god puts it in.

A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything. Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Karl's post
13-06-2012, 06:08 AM (This post was last modified: 13-06-2012 06:20 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: "There had to have been something"
(13-06-2012 03:51 AM)pppgggr Wrote:  In all honesty, I'm having issues understanding what Egor had put forth, and somewhat Bucky Ball, yet I understand him a bit more. I've tried several times to hop back into the conversation, but everything I tried typing seemed completely wrong, to either of the sides. I'm just going to admit that I'm having issues making sense of these concepts and leave it at that.
Dude, a 13 year old, has no "wrong" anything. Bouncing stuff around is what's it's all about. It's not a problem, unless ya live in Vaticans. There is a quiet ristorante out on the Via Veneto, or even the Via Flaminia. Caesar made the Via Appia (PM) for a reason. Cool

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: