|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Sept 10, 2010 5:19:07 GMT
Ouch. Have some ice, you need it: Essentially, Disabled's post summarizes the main part of the argument. Naturally you also have the fact that he thinks the Big Bang made life right off the bat, a common misconception that makes me die a little inside every time I read it.
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Zero on Oct 17, 2010 14:59:04 GMT
:Bump
And yes Qwerty that also has the same effect on me....
|
|
|
Post by Rock on Oct 25, 2010 14:07:58 GMT
Essentially, Disabled's post summarizes the main part of the argument. Naturally you also have the fact that he thinks the Big Bang made life right off the bat, a common misconception that makes me die a little inside every time I read it. I do not assume that the supposed big bang created life off the bat. We did a whole unit in science last year about evolution, and blah blah blah it took millions of years blah blah. What I'm saying is, yes, there is a tiny, minuscule of a chance something like the big bang could have happened, but then who made the emptiness that was before the supposed big bang? Or who caused the big bang? Human logic doesn't comprehend how something can just be created out of thin air, we need to know how why and how. The thought that it just appeared from no where is never an option to us, so as I said before, it's something that just doesn't make sense to us. A God. And disabled don't try to modify my post again. We can't understand how or what created us, but throughout all time, humans have believed in a god and or gods. Never in ancient history did a group, tribe, or nation not have a religion. This must mean something.
|
|
|
Post by disabled on Oct 25, 2010 15:13:00 GMT
I'm not really sure about your position Rock. Science is pretty sure that something like the big bang happened. And its a well known fact, that life wasn't here for billions of years after the BB. Science is pretty unsure about what was before the BB. Arguing with "human logic doesn't X" is pretty wrong, because I'm pretty sure you have absolutely no idea what theoretical physicists or mathematicians are capable of comprehending. If the rest of the population needs a god to for "understanding" how the world is made, thats ok for me. A friend of mine doesn't believe in the BB but in the creation of the world in 7 days, because its easier for him. He has absolutely no idea about physics, so its easier to believe in a god and everything else he doesn't understand is made by god. Simple. Thats why every culture had its gods, because they wanted the world explained. I think todays science is advanced enough to be sure, there is an explanation for everything. We might not ever find every explanation, but there pretty sure is one. But if we argue on that level, it becomes more a philosophical question then a religious one.
And if you only need a god to understand what was before the BB or similar, then you have to realize god has absolutely no meaning for your life. I think what was before the BB has absolutely no consequence for my life today.
Oh and I think its easier to believe before the BB there was just nothing, then there was a god who created the nothing. Because if I believe in a God, then I can ask again what god is and where he comes from and who created him and so on and I didn't really win anything with believing in god.
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Oct 26, 2010 6:13:58 GMT
Disabled may not quote your post, but I sure will in the morning. For now I'll just say it is pretty obvious you haven't heard of brane theory.
|
|
|
Post by ~Memzak~ on Oct 26, 2010 17:20:35 GMT
>.>
<.<
Our Big Bang and our Universe could be one of many. It probably is luck that our universe had the perfect laws of physics to be able to support life. Too much gravity and milliseconds after the big bang there would have been a big crunch. Too little gravity and stars wouldn't be able to form. To little electromagnetic force between protons and electrons and atoms wouldn't be able to form. Too much and they'd be too unstable.
Our universe is one bubble out of the many in the bathtub of everything. Some bubbles pop as soon as formed, some grow to astronomical sizes and keep growing until a big freeze and some bubbles have just the right rate of expansion to be able to support life. Our universe is one of these bubbles.
In our universe itself there are billions of planets in our galaxy and billions of galaxies. There are also billions of planets in the goldilocks zone. The zone where liquid water on the surface is possible. There are billions of planets where life as we know it can possibly form. Chances are that on at least one of those billions of planets life will form and due to the nature of life, life will succeed wherever and whenever possible.
Although that doesn't mean life couldn't form in different ways, ways we can't even conceive.
Life is like winning the lottery with odds of one to a quadrilion. But when you have a quadrilion picks from the basket, eventually one of them will win.
That's best how I can explain how the right conditions for life were formed. No big omnipotent being who was there before everything who made all the perfect conditions of 7 days.
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Oct 27, 2010 3:27:08 GMT
...And there's brane theory as it relates to this conversation.
|
|
|
Post by disabled on Oct 27, 2010 4:10:53 GMT
I don't understand qwerty, how does it relate to this conversation?
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Oct 27, 2010 5:29:38 GMT
Something about parallel universes and what was around pre-Big-Bang.
He was arguing that it is incredibly unlikely that life would evolve in our universe, and Memzak pointed out that brane theory shows that it is likely there are infinite other universes in which the laws of physics could align just right.
|
|
|
Post by ~Memzak~ on Oct 27, 2010 10:02:23 GMT
>_> <_<
Heh, yea. I couldn't help myself.
Funny, today I got into a discussion about something similar with a guy at school. (seriously his name was guy) He proposed an interesting theory too about how higher dimensions can come into this whole equation by trying to prove that the universe/time/everything cannot not exist. That guy... XD[/backtodebatenow]
I wonder what Rock's reply will be.
|
|
|
Post by sandmaster on Oct 28, 2010 5:22:47 GMT
Okay I probably won't be as intense as I was a few years back but I am open to debate this.
I don't believe in the existence of a creator, let alone a specific one.
|
|
|
Post by Rock on Nov 1, 2010 1:27:51 GMT
Disabled: I do not believe in the creation of everything in seven days because "it's simpler". Nothing says it was really seven days (well, 6 days really, day 7 was a day of rest). It could have very well been a metaphor or something similar, each day equalling up to thousands or millions of years. It explains the theory of evolution, which may be [partially] true, if each "day" did equal millions of years. I'm not saying that the BB never happened, or evolution doesn't exist, but I'm saying that something greater that us is really the only explanation of the universe(s)' creation is something, as stated, is something we cannot comprehend. God. I mean, really, just try to imagine it. Try to think before time, before the atoms that caused the big bang were even created. I don't know about you, but I simply cannot. Whenever I try, my head overheats, and I shudder a little.It simply has to be a God.
Qwerty: I don't know what the Brane Theory is, and I;m too lazy to google it, so, meh.
Memzak: Meh. Again, too lazy. Sorry.
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Nov 1, 2010 5:42:03 GMT
So what you are saying is:
a) You don't understand my argument and aren't going to bother finding out what it is.
b) Thinking about the origin of the universe is too complicated for you, ergo God.
|
|
|
Post by Fringe Pioneer on Nov 1, 2010 5:50:38 GMT
I have a question: if it's so easy to presume that there is a deity that has always existed, isn't it just as easy to say the same for matter?
|
|
|
Post by sandmaster on Nov 1, 2010 5:54:50 GMT
AFAIK People say time has only begun at the Big Bang because they could not observe the universe before it.
The something happened and they decided that time did not exist until our universe and then BAM: String theory.
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Nov 1, 2010 8:00:05 GMT
Time as we know it, at least. I love higher dimensions.
|
|
|
Post by disabled on Nov 1, 2010 12:53:22 GMT
Well qwerty IMO brane theory doesn't help here at all. Because you could still ask, who created those physics and everything. But still, imo its a philosophical question if you believe in a god who created all that or if it was there since forever. If you go with a god, thats fine an propably nobody can prove you otherwise. If you think it hasn't been created and was always there... I will propaply not find out in my lifetime for sure. Imo the universe is a miracle. Life is a miracle. Everything we know is a miracle. And in the end I don't care what made all that possible.
There is a point, where I don't want everything to be determined just by physics. If physics comes to a point, where they can explain everything what happens in this world, then everything is predetermined including my life and my thoughts. That would make life pretty boring and pointless. So I hope there has to be more to this world then physics, but I don't know. If god only created the physics itself, that would be a very boring thing to do as god.
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Nov 1, 2010 14:12:11 GMT
I'm not talking about who created it, this mention of brane theory is in reference is partly to someone saying the conditions to life are so rare that a God would have to have made it and partly to all those people that say the universe couldn't have started at the Big Bang.
I know that everything is predetermined by the laws of physics, but I accepted that long ago. That only applies on the micro scale. On the macro scale, it's still me, and I have no way of seeing the future. Plus, it's not actually 'predetermined'. When you take into account quantum physics, it has an element of randomness thrown in.
|
|
|
Post by Elmach on Nov 7, 2010 12:36:30 GMT
Essentially, Disabled's post summarizes the main part of the argument. Naturally you also have the fact that he thinks the Big Bang made life right off the bat, a common misconception that makes me die a little inside every time I read it. I do not assume that the supposed big bang created life off the bat. We did a whole unit in science last year about evolution, and blah blah blah it took millions of years blah blah. What I'm saying is, yes, there is a tiny, minuscule of a chance something like the big bang could have happened, but then who made the emptiness that was before the supposed big bang? Or who caused the big bang? Human logic doesn't comprehend how something can just be created out of thin air, we need to know how why and how. The thought that it just appeared from no where is never an option to us, so as I said before, it's something that just doesn't make sense to us. A God. And disabled don't try to modify my post again. We can't understand how or what created us, but throughout all time, humans have believed in a god and or gods. Never in ancient history did a group, tribe, or nation not have a religion. This must mean something. Who made the emptiness before the supposed big bang? That is like asking what is North of the North Pole. Besides, why does everything have to have a purpose? Who caused the big bang? ... See above. Everything about gods and what they create can be changed to metagods and gods, respectively, without losing meaning. As a matter of fact, it could potentially be moved the other way. Perhaps each atom is a universe... That reminds me of some short story... Of course humans believe in god/gods. They need an explanation for everything.
Why this planet? Why not the Giant Spaghetti Monster? If there is a god, who created the god? If god wasn't created, then how come we weren't?
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Zero on Nov 7, 2010 19:25:53 GMT
*Jumps right into the discussion*
I might not get this right because I'm a little rusty on the debate but here's my view on things once again. Since Humanity took its firsts steps and was able to make tools we have thought of things to worship, and what created all life as we know it. It splintered and fractured into multiple gods and goddesses, shamins told stories about how the earth and the solar system was created, cults soon became religions accepted by half the world, and plenty of other cults grew into religions. But you have to look at it this way: Why are there so many gods? How could there just be one god, when there are thousands all over the world? The Greeks had like around 10-13 gods and goddesses, we only have one now, there are plenty of religions out there that have their OWN GOD, there for there is no one god if you think about it. Or are there multiple heavens and hells for different religions that people worship? And if there was a single god why,(cleshay incoming) why would he "bless" us with famine , plagues, sickness, death, old age, Ect.? Why would he want people to kill others in his name? Why would he let his son get tortured and killed? (If that's even true)
Religion was created so the week-minded would have something to look up to and hopefully get into when they die. It also serves as a control mechanism. (Not all of them but most)
|
|
|
Post by GloveParty on Nov 9, 2010 0:24:54 GMT
Well, you expect everything to be jolly sugar-sweet if there's only one God, eh? Well, according to the Bible Adam and Eve sinned, and we don't live forever because he banished them before they could eat of the Tree of Life (which would make them live forever) It's not like EVERYTHING on earth that is negative is God's doing. It annoys me when people think there can't be a god because we wouldn't have any negative things. We're not simply puppets of God's command either. We have free will. If someone chooses to attack someone in god's name, it's not like God told them to.
And I am highly offended with your comment at the end. Religion is controlling me in any way. And I am not weak-minded for believing in God. Heck, some people might turn that last argument around and say something like: "Atheis is something made by people who don't have the capacity to believe in God. It serves as a way to fight against people who DO believe in God. " That's not my belief though. I'm just saying.
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Nov 9, 2010 0:52:49 GMT
Religion was CREATED as a way to control weak-minded people. That doesn't mean it is still doing the same.
|
|
|
Post by GloveParty on Nov 9, 2010 1:08:02 GMT
Actually, religion wasn't, in fact, made as a way to control people. It just evolved into that as some churches took advantage of their status in the religion.
|
|
|
Post by xShadowLordx on Nov 12, 2010 2:06:17 GMT
Religion was created so the week-minded would have something to look up to and hopefully get into when they die. It also serves as a control mechanism. (Not all of them but most) Ahem. You really should look before you leap. I don't appreciate being called a weak-minded fool. And contrary to your assertions, religion does not control me, it liberates me. Religion gives me inner peace and makes me content. It makes me a happier, more stable, more mature person. And I know this firsthand because I used to be apathetic about religion just a few months ago. I've seen both worlds. Now, there are some people who like to control society and use religion as a cover up. Namely, the Catholic Church. Throughout history, they threatened the European monarchs with excommunication to get them to meet their demands. They believed they got to decided who gets into heaven and who goes to hell. It's a pitiful, disgustingly arrogant practice. there are plenty of religions out there that have their OWN GOD True, but the majority of people today believe in the same God. 54% of the world's population all believe in the one Judeo-Christian God. 16% are nonreligious. 14% Hindu, 6% Buddhist, and the other 10% are mostly tribal/indigenous/native languages. And if there was a single god why,(cleshay incoming) why would he "bless" us with famine , plagues, sickness, death, old age, Ect.? I believe that nothing happens without God's permission. And I believe that everything happens for a reason. And I'm sure most people would agree that failure is how you learn lessons, no? So imagine what the world would be like if no one ever suffered. No one would ever learn lessons firsthand. No one would go through hardship and reform themselves when they get through it. No one would ever seek knowledge to improve their lives. No one would realize the faults and shortcomings of human beings, and no one would try to stand up and change the world. This world, according to religion, is merely a test. Everyone has different circumstances in their life, but what matters is what they choose to do with those circumstances. Why would he want people to kill others in his name? Why would he let his son get tortured and killed? (If that's even true) No major religion in the entire world condones the senseless killing of innocent nonbelievers. 'Nuff said. As for Jesus, a Christian would tell you that Jesus had to suffer to pay for the sins of all of humanity (which was really only the sin of two people, and [the Christian understanding of] God is apparently not nice enough to forgive sins, and is so illogical that he actually has to kill himself--only to come back to life--to pay for what somebody else did (No offense meant whatsoever to any Christians)). As a Muslim, I believe the God really didn't allow Jesus to suffer, and he was actually ascended to heaven (not to mention he isn't the Son of God). Either way, this argument isn't exactly relevant to the overall debate.
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Nov 12, 2010 6:29:51 GMT
Religion was created so the week-minded would have something to look up to and hopefully get into when they die. It also serves as a control mechanism. (Not all of them but most) Ahem. You really should look before you leap. I don't appreciate being called a weak-minded fool. And contrary to your assertions, religion does not control me, it liberates me. Religion gives me inner peace and makes me content. It makes me a happier, more stable, more mature person. And I know this firsthand because I used to be apathetic about religion just a few months ago. I've seen both worlds. Now, there are some people who like to control society and use religion as a cover up. Namely, the Catholic Church. Throughout history, they threatened the European monarchs with excommunication to get them to meet their demands. They believed they got to decided who gets into heaven and who goes to hell. It's a pitiful, disgustingly arrogant practice. It says "created to be", not "is". Remember, the Catholic Church came before the Protestant ones.True, but the majority of people today believe in the same God. 54% of the world's population all believe in the one Judeo-Christian God. 16% are nonreligious. 14% Hindu, 6% Buddhist, and the other 10% are mostly tribal/indigenous/native languages. Right, I forgot that the majority of people believing in it at a specific point makes it correct. Oh, wait... it doesn't.I believe that nothing happens without God's permission. And I believe that everything happens for a reason. And I'm sure most people would agree that failure is how you learn lessons, no? So imagine what the world would be like if no one ever suffered. No one would ever learn lessons firsthand. No one would go through hardship and reform themselves when they get through it. No one would ever seek knowledge to improve their lives. No one would realize the faults and shortcomings of human beings, and no one would try to stand up and change the world. This world, according to religion, is merely a test. Everyone has different circumstances in their life, but what matters is what they choose to do with those circumstances. Right, and that is why Down Syndrome never happens without God's permission, because those people deserved to have a random genetic disorder despite having done nothing wrong and having nothing to learn from it.Why would he want people to kill others in his name? Why would he let his son get tortured and killed? (If that's even true) No major religion in the entire world condones the senseless killing of innocent nonbelievers. 'Nuff said. As mentioned on chat, "No True Scottsman".As for Jesus, a Christian would tell you that Jesus had to suffer to pay for the sins of all of humanity (which was really only the sin of two people, and [the Christian understanding of] God is apparently not nice enough to forgive sins, and is so illogical that he actually has to kill himself--only to come back to life--to pay for what somebody else did (No offense meant whatsoever to any Christians)). I gotta admit this part is true.As a Muslim, I believe the God really didn't allow Jesus to suffer, and he was actually ascended to heaven (not to mention he isn't the Son of God). Either way, this argument isn't exactly relevant to the overall debate. Green parts are mine.
|
|
|
Post by xShadowLordx on Nov 13, 2010 0:10:00 GMT
Right, I forgot that the majority of people believing in it at a specific point makes it correct. Oh, wait... it doesn't. Take the time to actually read both his statement and mine. I wasn't trying to say it was right. I was simply showing that not every religion has its own God. Right, and that is why Down Syndrome never happens without God's permission, because those people deserved to have a random genetic disorder despite having done nothing wrong and having nothing to learn from it. First of all, by saying that God controls everything/allows it to happen, I am in no way trying to say that genetics or any other sciences are separate from God. My religious beliefs do not contradict science at all. And the seeking of knowledge is a major part of Islam. God is, of course, responsible for genetics and all other aspects of science. My religion says that people are born with different circumstances on purpose, and therefore we are not all at the same level of fortune in this life. With that being said, God will judge us all based on what we did, given our circumstances. Obviously, someone with Down syndrome, for example, will not be held to the same standards as a person of sound mental health. A person not fully capable of understanding right and wrong will obviously not be punished for it. As far as I know at the moment, it really has more to do with the afterlife than with worldly life. If I eventually find some more info and understand it better, I'll get back to you on that. As mentioned on chat, "No True Scottsman". I've been over this before. It has absolutely nothing to do with the No True Scotsman fallacy. This fallacy is about a man condemning another man's actions as un-Scotsman-like, even though those actions--or lack thereof-- are not an inherent criterion of being a Scotsman. Religion is not the same. I used the example of Islam on chat. Islam, like the other Abrahamic religions, preaches the Ten Commandments, one of them being "Thou shalt not kill [an innocent person]". A Muslim is defined as someone who follows Islam and its teachings. Following the Ten Commandments is an inherent criterion of being a Muslim. Anyone who does not follow the Commandments (especially "Thou shalt not kill", being one of the most major ones), is blatantly defying Islam. A person who defies Islam--certainly in such a major way as to defy the Commandments--is not a Muslim. Therefore, it is logical to say that no follower of Islam (a.k.a. a Muslim) would kill any innocent person, because this an inherent criterion of being a Muslim.
|
|
|
Post by disabled on Nov 13, 2010 1:25:52 GMT
If its all about afterlife and he judges us based on our circumstances... then I believe he can't judge us based on our believe in him. 2000 years after Jesus, different religions to believe in, War, economics, hunger in the 3rd world and all the pain religions have caused... can you blame anyone who looses faith in god? If god is angry at me because I don't believe in him, then he should go to hell. Well perhaps for me after I die its game over and it stays black, where for religious people the afterlife begins. But I live now and I won't change my life because of pure faith in something that has no proof (I have seen). And if there is no heaven for me, then there can't be a heaven for my girlfriend, because she would miss me too much (she says) and shes a believer.
I believed in god for a long time, because I thought it was nice to have someone I can thank at the end of a good day. But that was a made up reason for a god and I lost faith. Also I hope there is a heaven, where I can ask all the questions I ever wanted. But the more I thought about a heaven, I realized it would either be impossible to create a heaven where everyone is happy or its a heaven I don't want. Like the paradise in the beginning, I don't want to run around naked (scratch that, I want to run around naked) and don't have a clue about what the world is about. By the way, is there a difference between the paradise in the beginning and the heaven you can get to after you die?
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Nov 13, 2010 2:12:49 GMT
Heh... God going to hell. There's something a bit odd in that.
As to the No True Scottsman, I wasn't talking about Islam. I was talking about religion.
As to the down syndome, I never said God wasn't responsible for genetics. By your argument, he is. But is "They are judged on a different scale" really an excuse for God allowing Down Syndome to exist? Innocent people's lives, ruined?
|
|
|
Post by kuraikiba on Nov 13, 2010 2:47:30 GMT
I'll make my argument simple and logical.
I obviously believe in a God not only out of religious purpose, but out of logical purpose. If no being is strictly able to bend and warp reality and physics and redefine (as well as define), the two necessary factors for the materialization of matter, then some logical explanation for the creation of the universe and existence on a multi-planear multidimensional realm basis, with extraordinarily complex life that exists and the set of extremely complex physics and logistics of our existence, therefore stating that:
If N is not achieved, and O is not explained,
Then O cannot exist without N. Therefore, O is possible iff N is achieved.
O being a viable creation explanation, and N being a Creator Variable. Since no O has been given that could be in both a realistic realm of logical probability and satisfies Occam's Razor, then N must be, as it stands as far more biologically, logically, and physically viable. In more blunt terms, N still stands true because it proposes the perfectly viable statement of a Creator Variable, or a being that can define, redefine, and most importantly, mold physics to redefine what is possible. Three examples below have either major paralogisms as their basis, or unresolved variables:
1. Idea that atoms randomly assembled
First, notice the clear use of The Horse Laugh fallacy. Second, where would those atoms have come from, and where did it take place? Third, the likelihood of that event happening to create massively complex life, thousands of planets and stars, and had minimal error is infinitesimally small.
1. Evolutionism: Idea of a common ancestor creating all life
First, note that that implies Earth was already here. Therefor it fails to define O. Second, notice that this also means transpecial mutation, which does NOT happen. Third, the one-celled organism described by Charles Darwin was a non-diving prokaryote. Lastly, where did the first cell come from?
3. Big bang theory: Vaccuum irregularity causing explosion
First, where did it take place if no universe existed? Second, how does a vacuum cause an infinitely dense ball of infinite heat to explode with infinite force (Infinity is not a practical variable as it causes undefined solutions). Third, would not such an event light all of existence on fire? Last, how does a giant explosion break the laws of physics to create matter?
These and more are flawed in several concepts. Therefore, unless a suitable and realistically viable O can replace N, nothing makes more logical sense that the idea of a God.
|
|
|
Post by sandmaster on Nov 13, 2010 3:06:45 GMT
I'm not going to actively denounce religion, but you're actively attacking science itself, so:
Logical fallacy: A=>B, B, Therefore A
We've had 8 billion years to randomly assemble and happened to land on Earth. With all of the hydrogen in the world, it's surprising it took us this long.
Evolution is not made to define the purpose or origin of existence of life, but depict the growth of life from a common ancestor.
You not only failed to define the line separating species, and failed to inform us that we've only had 50 years to observe a phenomenon that takes thousands of years at a time.
Not knowing what happens before the Big Bang does not: A: Imply that NOTHING happened, or that physics were created, or broken B: Imply that there exists some God
A=>B, but !A does not necessarily mean !B (same fallacy in the beginning)
We have no knowledge of the amount of heat, and if there was infinite heat then thermodynamics show that there is infinite heat now.
Finally, "nothing makes more logical sense" does not prove that God exists: If A is the most reasonable solution, it does not require A to be the only possible method.
|
|
|