science makes case for god
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-01-2015, 12:41 AM
RE: science makes case for god
(03-01-2015 12:35 AM)Ocean theRAPIST Wrote:  I could start a whole forum on the stuff he comes up with. I wouldn't be surprised if at one point he's been to this page and been banned. He loves to debate. I know he gets kicked out of sports pages all the time.

Ooo, Goody! Do I hear a Boxing Ring victim competitor?Evil_monsterEvil_monsterEvil_monster

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-01-2015, 12:46 AM
RE: science makes case for god
(03-01-2015 12:36 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(03-01-2015 12:35 AM)Ocean theRAPIST Wrote:  I could start a whole forum on the stuff he comes up with. I wouldn't be surprised if at one point he's been to this page and been banned. He loves to debate. I know he gets kicked out of sports pages all the time.

We tend to be good at this. We've had some practice. Tongue

I'm learning. In a way it's kinda good that he's pushing me. I've been learning a lot. This forum has definitely helped. I'll keep you guys posted. I might to start a new thread for each topic he comes up with otherwise, is going to get a little long.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-01-2015, 12:46 AM
RE: science makes case for god
(03-01-2015 12:22 AM)Ocean theRAPIST Wrote:  [quote='Bucky Ball' pid='712703' dateline='1420265001']
You can send him Sean Carroll's debate with W.L. Craig. He doesn't get that he's playing with fire.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-H6hdjpRRw

There is no way in hell he argues for religion. Carroll is an atheist, Ellis is a Quaker, not a Christian. Whether Krauss succeeds or fails is basically irrelevant.
He is not required to provide "ultimate answers" to anything. All he has to do is point out stupid arguments. "We don't know yet" is a perfectly acceptable answer.
Your father's entire rant about Physics is essentially a "god of the gaps" argument. He's got no better answer, so he *needs* to plug in a god,
(secondary to his low ambiguity tolerance, and need for cognitive closure).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguity_tolerance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closure_%28psychology%29

I'll try sending it to him. Thanks for the info. I'm a complete amateur at debating. I've never had to debate anyone before and he's been studying subjects that benefit him for a long time. I've never cared enough to engage him in debate until my son was born. Any info is much appreciated.
[/quote]

Two hours is a lot to ask of him. Especially when there's back and fourth and he needs time to digest idea's so he can't bang it out over an evening or anything like that. I saw this, this morning.

It's more concise and it doesn't have the formal debate diction that's sometimes hard to follow.

What I think is a bigger problem is this bullshit:
(02-01-2015 11:54 PM)Ocean theRAPIST Wrote:  [quote='Smercury44' pid='712477' dateline='1420244955']
(Krauss, as an atheist, follower of Darwin, and a speaker at major atheist conferences also has a religious agenda, as atheism is also a religion).

[snip]

In fact he doesn't deny them concerning our universe, he just proposes an alternate "theory" to support "his" pet religion, atheism. He just has a bunch of hopes and dreams presented as scientific fact, none of which is proveable.

And that he doesn't seem to respect you. (I can only help with one of them. Sorry.)

Ask him for a definition of a religion. Make that the only thing you're asking about, that'll help keep him concise and on subject.

Post it here if you need help to show him that that's not athiesm. Condede ground if you need to: Say he's right and that you're now agnostic or that his definition isn't what you believe.

Making the illusion of compromise will (possibly) help smooth the discussion.

This isn't formal debate. Don't rant back at him. Keep it conversational. Don't attack his belief and make it clear that you don't take issue with his religion just the argument he's using to convince you. (Even if that's a lie.)

And again; ask for help when you need it. I've got basically no experience with the whole debate/ argument thing but there are people here who do and you're already smarter than he is.

You can do it.

Soulless mutants of muscle and intent. There are billions of us; hardy, smart and dangerous. Shaped by millions of years of death. We are the definitive alpha predator. We build monsters of fire and stone. We bottled the sun. We nailed our god to a stick.

In man's struggle against the world, bet on the man.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue's post
03-01-2015, 01:35 AM (This post was last modified: 03-01-2015 01:47 AM by OceanTherapist.)
RE: science makes case for god
It's more concise and it doesn't have the formal debate diction that's sometimes hard to follow.

In fact he doesn't deny them concerning our universe, he just proposes an alternate "theory" to support "his" pet religion, atheism. He just has a bunch of hopes and dreams presented as scientific fact, none of which is proveable. [/quote]

And that he doesn't seem to respect you. (I can only help with one of them. Sorry.)

Ask him for a definition of a religion. Make that the only thing you're asking about, that'll help keep him concise and on subject.

Post it here if you need help to show him that that's not athiesm. Condede ground if you need to: Say he's right and that you're now agnostic or that his definition isn't what you believe.

Making the illusion of compromise will (possibly) help smooth the discussion.

This isn't formal debate. Don't rant back at him. Keep it conversational. Don't attack his belief and make it clear that you don't take issue with his religion just the argument he's using to convince you. (Even if that's a lie.)

And again; ask for help when you need it. I've got basically no experience with the whole debate/ argument thing but there are people here who do and you're already smarter than he is.

You can do it.
[/quote]

I've always tried to keep it to a conversation with him. I usually back down from attacking him since he is my son's grandfather. He does understand that the burden is on him and almost every week he gives me something to read that he puts together. I don't like always putting the ball in his court but, that is how it's gone and it keeps him occupied. He has a huge ego and anytime I don't respond, his head gets a little bigger.

As for not taking issue with his religion, I wouldn't, if it only involved me. He's only trying to convince me that I should let him indoctrinate my son and that is what led me to this forum.

My wife says she's Christian and I have no problem with her telling our son her beliefs. I agreed to that long before he was born. She is no where near her father's level and doesn't believe half the shit he says.

I look to this page a lot for advice since finding it. There's a lot of good people here.

I know I will never convince him to lose his beliefs. He's already told me even if I were to disprove his beliefs, good ol' Pascal's wager would come into play but, for the sake of my son I will play along and humer him.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-01-2015, 01:45 AM (This post was last modified: 03-01-2015 01:49 AM by Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue.)
RE: science makes case for god
^That's good. Though hummer-ing him will probably make the problem worse.

I also took a needlessly condesending tone so. :/

Edit: Won't let me post the annoyed emote for some reason.

Soulless mutants of muscle and intent. There are billions of us; hardy, smart and dangerous. Shaped by millions of years of death. We are the definitive alpha predator. We build monsters of fire and stone. We bottled the sun. We nailed our god to a stick.

In man's struggle against the world, bet on the man.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-01-2015, 10:50 AM
RE: science makes case for god
So, I asked him:

What do you mean by this?

In fact he doesn't deny them concerning our universe, he just proposes an alternate "theory" to support "his" pet religion, atheism. He just has a bunch of hopes and dreams presented as scientific fact, none of which is proveable.

What do you define as religion? 

Here is his response:
In his very first point (point 1 below) Krauss said "We KNOW the many factors that were important here on Earth", (he's not even trying to deny this fact any longer, on earth, anyway proved by a myriad of other scientists, in many different fields, that at least 200 factors are necessary to sustain life on earth, the very point of his refutation of this whole article)


 but we do not know what set of other factors might allow a different evolutionary history elsewhere (so instead he changes tack and tries to change the argument to some mystical elsewhere, other planet, other universe, other anything that has no basis in provable scientific fact, just his wish. He goes from basing his whole argument against what it takes to sustain life on this planet, then slyly quietly accepts this premise on EARTH but tries to change it up by talking about some unnamed, unshown, elsewhere.


Atheism is a religion. It's a religion of self where man makes himself God. Man is the final arbiter of right and wrong, not a creator. In essence man makes himself the creator. Buddhism is considered a religion by atheist, but they don't believe in an over reaching deity such as the God of the Bible either.


Atheism has a belief in self. Though no atheist knows every thing there is to know, about everything in the world, the atheist is still so smug and arrogant as to believe he "knows" there is no God. Show me the atheist that knows EVERYTHING there is to know about quantum physics, string theory, electronics, electricity, magnetism, solar activity, nuclear power, and on and on and on. Yet the atheist will arrogantly say he KNOWS there is no God though he knows less than 1/1,000,000,000 of the world around him. The atheist that admits he knows NOTHING about string theory, yet says he absolutely KNOWS there is no God, is not only a fool, he's delusional. He may not want to BELIEVE there is a God, but to flat out say there is no God when it's easily provable that he knows very little about the world around him just shows the arrogance of the atheist.


To KNOW there is no God, a person must know EVERYTHING there is to know in the world and outside of it...which would make him a god. No wonder atheists hate be called on this.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-01-2015, 11:16 AM (This post was last modified: 03-01-2015 11:34 AM by Free.)
RE: science makes case for god
(03-01-2015 10:50 AM)Ocean theRAPIST Wrote:  To KNOW there is no God, a person must know EVERYTHING there is to know in the world and outside of it...which would make him a god. No wonder atheists hate be called on this.

Do you know that there is no sentient Flying Spaghetti Monster orbiting the earth getting ready to dump spaghetti sauce on the unsuspecting planet?

Do you know that there is no 1 + 1 = 3?

What do you know?

My point is obvious. When you know it is too fucking ridiculous to be true, how the fuck can you say we cannot know there is no god? Saying that we cannot know implies that we cannot know anything, using that fucked up logic.

If you know there are not 1, 200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 rotating psychedelic teapots marching down main street right this very minute, then yes, you can absolutely positively claim "I KNOW there is no god."

I am a perfect 7 on the Dawkins Scale of atheism, and I make no bones about it. I was born with no beliefs in any gods, and I will die with none.

Drinking Beverage

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-01-2015, 12:09 PM
RE: science makes case for god
(03-01-2015 10:50 AM)Ocean theRAPIST Wrote:  Here is his response:
In his very first point (point 1 below) Krauss said "We KNOW the many factors that were important here on Earth", (he's not even trying to deny this fact any longer, on earth, anyway proved by a myriad of other scientists, in many different fields, that at least 200 factors are necessary to sustain life on earth, the very point of his refutation of this whole article)

The built in assumption here is that we are talking about life as it exists on Earth now. Identifying the factors that had to be for the conclusion we have is a post-hoc rationalization that those factors had to exist in the first place. If they hadn't, we would not be here. It's like saying the cards had to be in a certain order because you got the hand you were dealt. That's true, but doesn't prove that anything deliberately ordered the cards.

Quote:but we do not know what set of other factors might allow a different evolutionary history elsewhere (so instead he changes tack and tries to change the argument to some mystical elsewhere, other planet, other universe, other anything that has no basis in provable scientific fact, just his wish. He goes from basing his whole argument against what it takes to sustain life on this planet, then slyly quietly accepts this premise on EARTH but tries to change it up by talking about some unnamed, unshown, elsewhere.

"some mystical elsewhere"... where have I heard that sort of thing before... Oh, like "god exists outside space and time"? Krauss is only saying that we have a given set of conditions here so the life we find here relies on those conditions; if different conditions exist "elsewhere" (or if they had existed here) then maybe there would be no life and maybe there would be different life.

Quote:Atheism is a religion. It's a religion of self where man makes himself God. Man is the final arbiter of right and wrong, not a creator. In essence man makes himself the creator. Buddhism is considered a religion by atheist, but they don't believe in an over reaching deity such as the God of the Bible either.

That's a stream of non-sequiturs and babble. Atheists aren't making themselves the creator or gods. Atheists are just following the evidence as far as it will take them.

Quote:Atheism has a belief in self. Though no atheist knows every thing there is to know, about everything in the world, the atheist is still so smug and arrogant as to believe he "knows" there is no God.

Since that isn't what most atheists argue, this is a strawman. Besides, any theist who claims to "know" that god exists would then have to know every possible cause for what they are attributing to god and have ruled them all out. If the theists doesn't know everything there is to know about everything in the world then they can't be so smug and arrogant as to believe they "know" there is a god.

Quote:The atheist that admits he knows NOTHING about string theory, yet says he absolutely KNOWS there is no God, is not only a fool, he's delusional. He may not want to BELIEVE there is a God, but to flat out say there is no God when it's easily provable that he knows very little about the world around him just shows the arrogance of the atheist.

Good thing most atheists just say they don't believe and not that they know then. At least atheists aren't claiming that the omnipotent creator of the universe designed everything just for them and desires a personal relationship with them above all else. Talk about arrogance -- theists are masters of it.

Quote:To KNOW there is no God, a person must know EVERYTHING there is to know in the world and outside of it...which would make him a god. No wonder atheists hate be called on this.

As Free noted, there are things that can be known with high degrees of certainty even without knowing everything. The Christian god, as normally described, can be argued to be logically inconsistent which makes it reasonable to believe that that god does not exist.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes unfogged's post
03-01-2015, 12:32 PM (This post was last modified: 03-01-2015 01:21 PM by Stevil.)
RE: science makes case for god
(27-12-2014 08:50 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  Looks to be a very old god-of-the-gaps argument combined with the fine tuning nonsense.
What kind of scientist thinks that gaps in a current theory or current scientific knowledge equates to evidence for your own preferred conclusion?
Even non scientists ought to know this reasoning is rubbish.

E.g. We don't know if there is life on other planets other than Earth therefore we have proof that it must have occurred when a penis shaped nebulous cloud enters a mature black hole then life is created and deposited on Earth.

We don't know how energy began to exist therefore we have proof that it must have been because the interdimentional timespaces collided at right angles (nothing crashing into nothing) with just the correct speed and angular momentum resulting in an awesome fireworks display with the right universal constants resulting in life in our universe.

There you go. Science has proven it.Cool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-01-2015, 12:58 PM
RE: science makes case for god
(03-01-2015 10:50 AM)Ocean theRAPIST Wrote:  Atheism is a religion. It's a religion of self where man makes himself God. Man is the final arbiter of right and wrong, not a creator. In essence man makes himself the creator.
There is no atheist scripture, no atheists sermons, no atheist rituals. A rock, a tree, a dog and a new born baby all qualify as atheists because they all lack a belief in magical gods.

(03-01-2015 10:50 AM)Ocean theRAPIST Wrote:  To KNOW there is no God, a person must know EVERYTHING there is to know in the world and outside of it...which would make him a god. No wonder atheists hate be called on this.
The vast majority of atheists are weak atheists, which means we lack a belief in gods rather than that we believe there are no gods.

Since there is no evidence what-so-ever for any gods, let alone there not being any coherent definition of a god, we tend to not even consider that gods might exist, the same thing goes for fairies, goblins, ghost, ghouls, dragons, witches, big foot, wizards...

We talk out religion and gods though because many of us are super amazed that so many adults in society have such silly beliefs.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stevil's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: