By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Atheits ... How Many On VGChartz ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse#Level_III:_Many-worlds_interpretation_of_quantum_mechanics

I have a very clear understanding of the Many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics thank you very much, and I don't need bold to point it out.  What I'm saying is that provided this very mainstream interpretation of quantum physics is true at one point a "coin was tossed", splitting up two groups of universes, those with and those without a God.  This universe could either be in the group with or without God.  Have fun finding out.

And don't tell me you've never doubted being an atheist, cuz I've doubted God enough times in my life and all I have to risk by believing in him is that when I die I cease to exist.



I'm not a fanboy, I just don't enjoy dual analog control.  It's d-pad or wii-mote for me.

the conduit has changed the way wii play games.

I know.  I'm sick of the puns too.

Around the Network
kevin the wiiite said:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse#Level_III:_Many-worlds_interpretation_of_quantum_mechanics

I have a very clear understanding of the Many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics thank you very much, and I don't need bold to point it out.  What I'm saying is that provided this very mainstream interpretation of quantum physics is true at one point a "coin was tossed", splitting up two groups of universes, those with and those without a God.  This universe could either be in the group with or without God.  Have fun finding out.

And don't tell me you've never doubted being an atheist, cuz I've doubted God enough times in my life and all I have to risk by believing in him is that when I die I cease to exist.

Well I haven't always been an atheist. But since I have been (which was about 8 or 9), no real doubts no.

Also the many worlds interpretation doesn't imply that there is a god anywhere. It implies that every change on a quantum level splits into every possibility of that change. It doesn't actually change the laws of physics to add supernatural beings. It also doesn't imply that everything has a fifty percent chance of existing in every universe, it merely implies that every possibility exists in a universe.

Also the many worlds theory is against your religion in any case, god cannot be omnipotent but only exist in some universes - that implies a limit on his powers.



kevin the wiiite said:

The problem with that is the assumption that because God allows evil he himself is.  The Incredibles is a great movie describing a similar issue.  If everyone is a superhero, then nobody is.  In turn, if everyone always did good, then your actions would be relatively neutral.  God therefore allows evil to give good its proper context.  What is faith without temptation?  nothing.

And yes, apart from the occasional cold I do sleep quite well at night.  Better than the occasional nag in my subconscious, "but what if I'm wrong?  Does that mean I'm going to burn in hell for eternity?"  I don't know how anyone can live with that.

And according to the theory of infinite universes there would be some in which there is hell and some in which there is not, a 50/50 chance to burn for all you quantum physicists out there.

That in itself is evil.



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

Member of the Atheist Clan accounted for!



kevin the wiiite said:

I have a big problem with one thing people are saying - "The bible is full of fictional stories."  Explain to me the thin layer of oil found throughout the entire middle east without their being a catastrophic flood to destroy and cover up that much forested area..  Explain Josephus' writings on the destruction of the Jews by Nero.  Explain the Egyptian record which tells a similar story of an enslaved people being let go by Pharaoh.  Explain the remains of the city of Jericho that was sacked by the Jews in the bible. (The walls being blown down by trumpet blasts even has its basis in science with natural frequency!)  Explain why 4 people would write entirely different accounts of the life of Jesus without having actually seen it. You can choose whether or not to believe in God, but the bible is as historical as any other ancient writing.  (a nice parallel is the recent discovery of the city of Troy proving the historical basis of the Iliad and the Odyssey)

Carbon 14 is absolutely useless as a dating technique because nobody knows how much carbon 14 you start with in ancient bone, or how much dissolves into the system while the bone turns to rock.  It's much better proven that human bones don't even last 2,000 years in most cases because of all the roman tombs found with only dust where there was once a body.  The oldest of bones preserved by ice where bacteria are rarely around to decompose anything are found to be about 10,000 years old.

And what person would put themselves up against this evidence? One who doesn't want to submit to a higher power.  It's ironic, the Democrats, who generally are less theistic, (Not to put all democrats in one box) don't want to submit to a higher power, and yet constantly increase the size of government.

Oh - and you can put me in the box with the other Protestant Christians here.  I don't play GTA IV and don't swear on Halo like a five year old who just learned some new four letter words.


Well, I'm not in the business of trying to deconvert Christians, so I'm not really going to get into the first part of your post. In short to say my position would be that I wouldn't deny that there is historical credibility to some stories in the bible (as with many texts). But I would also say that much of it should certainly be taken allegorically (like the flood, which if it happened we would see evidence for a severe population bottleneck for every species, which we don't see unless we go back the KT extinction event, well before humans even walked the Earth).

But I want to talk about the rest of your post.

There is a lot of misinformation that has been going around about C-14 dating methods, most of it spread by people who want to try and deny it's accuracy.

C-14 dating is reliable, and it has been calibrated by evidence found in the field dendrochronology (which can date a 10,000 year old tree to the exact year) to show C-14 dating's accuracy is more than practical enough to be used as a dating method.

As for the initial ratio of C-14 to C-12, yes it can be determined accurately. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere that uses C-14 instead of C-12 has remained constant globally for the past 10,000 years at least. The initial ratio can be determined with extreme  accuracy. It's a commonly reported fallacy to say that it isn't.

There are of course exceptions that can throw off accuracy and scientists don't deny these. The main two being carbon reservoir giving false readings and dating organisms that have lived post 1944. Scientists know to avoid falling into the Carbon reservoir trap when dating something, and so this very rarely (as in never) gives false readings, because it is never used. And as for post 1944 dating, scientists don't use samples from after 1944 as nuclear testing increased the amount of C-14 in the atmosphere, and that's ok for testing things that died before then, but not afterwards.

Scientists know these pitfalls, and avoid them to maintain correct accuracy. so there really is no worry with carbon dating.

As for older samples. Carbon dating is not used because it is only good for up to 10,000 years. after that we date the igneous rock around the fossil, which again gives accurate dates.



Around the Network
kevin the wiiite said:

I have a big problem with one thing people are saying - "The bible is full of fictional stories."  Explain to me the thin layer of oil found throughout the entire middle east without their being a catastrophic flood to destroy and cover up that much forested area..  Explain Josephus' writings on the destruction of the Jews by Nero.  Explain the Egyptian record which tells a similar story of an enslaved people being let go by Pharaoh.  Explain the remains of the city of Jericho that was sacked by the Jews in the bible. (The walls being blown down by trumpet blasts even has its basis in science with natural frequency!)  Explain why 4 people would write entirely different accounts of the life of Jesus without having actually seen it. You can choose whether or not to believe in God, but the bible is as historical as any other ancient writing.  (a nice parallel is the recent discovery of the city of Troy proving the historical basis of the Iliad and the Odyssey)

Carbon 14 is absolutely useless as a dating technique because nobody knows how much carbon 14 you start with in ancient bone, or how much dissolves into the system while the bone turns to rock.  It's much better proven that human bones don't even last 2,000 years in most cases because of all the roman tombs found with only dust where there was once a body.  The oldest of bones preserved by ice where bacteria are rarely around to decompose anything are found to be about 10,000 years old.

Yet bones of 5,000 year old pharoahs are in great condition, with hair still intact.  You have a misunderstanding of science, so instead of delving into atomic isotopes or geology I'll just advise that you to research that area on your own (and not from a preacher or religious blogger who knows less about religion than I do about making women happy).

Natural frequency (resonance) is a property of all solids.  But stone walls aren't made of a single material (stone, mud, brick, wood), and even the same type of rock taken from the same source will have different properties.  When materials have different natural frequencies they dampen the frequency.  Engineers easily cancel out resonance by combing materials of different natural frequency.  Below is a link that is supports your religious theory, but with a ton of assumptions the engineer can still only claim that it was the marching of the army that brought down the walls, which is laughable when you think about how small ancient armies were.  If this was the case, every time there was a parade the town would come tumbling down.  Hitler's army would have destroyed itself on their first march through Berlin :)

http://www.reliabilityweb.com/index.php/articles/a_look_into_pulse_theory_and_why_the_walls_of_jericho_fell/

There is historical evidence of the Hebrews.  In the Armana Letters, which were political correspondance between Egypt and its neighbors, the Habiru (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habiru)  were nomadic raiders from the desert who were attacking the Canaanites.  No where is there any evidence about Egypt letting slaves go.



The most intelligent answer why someone believes in god came from an intelligent friend. He said he doesn't think that god exists, but he believes.

He got the point. There's no reason to believe in god regarding the FACTS and everyone trying to prove gods existence with FACTS is just laughable. These persons are just blinded god fanboys.

If there is any reason to believe in god, it's just that it makes you feel better, nothing else.

But i am not dump enough to kid myself, sadly.



ninty_shareholder64 said:

The most intelligent answer why someone believes in god came from an intelligent friend. He said he doesn't think that god exists, but he believes.

He got the point. There's no reason to believe in god regarding the FACTS and everyone trying to prove gods existence with FACTS is just laughable. These persons are just blinded god fanboys.

If there is any reason to believe in god, it's just that it makes you feel better, nothing else.

But i am not dump enough to kid myself, sadly.

So anyone who believes in something that cannot be proven with facts at the moment, are dumb?



*raises hand*

me!



Rainbird said:
ninty_shareholder64 said:

The most intelligent answer why someone believes in god came from an intelligent friend. He said he doesn't think that god exists, but he believes.

He got the point. There's no reason to believe in god regarding the FACTS and everyone trying to prove gods existence with FACTS is just laughable. These persons are just blinded god fanboys.

If there is any reason to believe in god, it's just that it makes you feel better, nothing else.

But i am not dump enough to kid myself, sadly.

So anyone who believes in something that cannot be proven with facts at the moment, are dumb?

Yes!

lol