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

Forums - General - Do you think Darwin is right

akuma587 on 15 February 2009
Soleron said:
Avalach21 said:
...

 

God isn't "Stuff."  God isn't in "time" or "space."  God doesn't exist in our "universe."  So therefore a hypothetical "God" doesn't fall under the laws that govern our universe.  So if there were to be a "God" it would be impossible for us to understand him, or his existance, and questions such as "how did he come to exist?" make no sense, becasue he doesn't "exist" in our sense of the word.  This is why it is hard (impossible) for science to prove or disprove God, because you can't test something that does not follow the rules of science.

1. Our universe is deterministic (all things have a cause). If God is outside these rules, he cannot affect the universe at all. He can't talk to people or perform miracles. I assume you believe in a personal (interventionist) God? You can't have both.

2. Even if there is such a supernatural cause to the universe, your description doesn't imply any of the qualities usually assigned to "God" - a cause outside time need not be sentient, or benevolent, or intefering, or omniscient/potent/present.Suppose a lump of extradimensional cheese caused the universe. If I call that cheese "God", it fits your description but is not appropriate to worship.

Conclusion: Whether or not something supernatural created the universe has no bearing on traditions of religion or religious belief.

 

Couldn't have said it better myself! 

The supernatural cause argument does not make the cause for Christianity or any other religion stronger.  If anything, it probably makes the argument for any one religion WEAKER because you are essentially conceding that the ultimate force that created the universe is unknowable and could very well be a lump of cheese or what have you.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Around the Network
Soleron on 15 February 2009
akuma587 said:
...

...and could very well be a lump of cheese or what have you.

 

I was going to write Flying Spaghetti Monster. But I worried that I would be struck by His noodly appendage.



Snaaaaaake on 15 February 2009

There is nothing logical about a belief in God.



akuma587 on 15 February 2009
Snaaaaaake said:
There is nothing logical about a belief in God.

You are oversimplifying things to some degree.  A belief, yes, is often not based on logic.  That doesn't mean that logic cannot support that belief, however.  To some degree it is logical that there had to be something that created this universe since it is a relatively convincing argument that something cannot just come from nothing.

But the key is that it isn't more logical to believe that than thinking that the universe was created by entirely natural forces.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

im_sneaky on 15 February 2009
Soleron said:
akuma587 said:
...

...and could very well be a lump of cheese or what have you.

 

I was going to write Flying Spaghetti Monster. But I worried that I would be struck by His noodly appendage.

 

When refering to His Noodly Appendage, please use a capital letter at the beginning. His Noodly Appendages are known for their Pride.



 

 

Around the Network
SamuelRSmith on 15 February 2009

btw, you can order a free poster from the BBC/Open University detailing the Tree of Life

http://www.open2.net/darwin/poster.html

It's part of Darwin season on the BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/darwin/



Final-Fan on 15 February 2009

You mean "Their pride".



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Slimebeast on 15 February 2009
Final-Fan said:
I think that one of slimebeast's problems is that physics in the area being discussed sounds so weird to most laymen. I mean, a lot of that stuff TOTALLY flies in the face of 'common sense'.

Seriously, I can't know the precise momentum of something I know the exact location of? WTF is that? So slimebeast finds these explanations repellent because they are strange to him. I can see this in his arguments that basically boil down to "it sounds crazy so it can't be true".

I'm afraid, slimebeast, that they can.

lol, don't assume so much.

The problem isn't understanding.

The problem is that a multiverse theory is less reasonable to believe in than in a God.

People want to believe in it (and similar theories, despite not having a scientific basis - but hey, at least it's not a God), but they actually dont. I don't think anyone actually believes that there exists an insane amount of parallel universes with near carbon copies of each person on earth running around and living the same life.

 



FaRmLaNd on 15 February 2009

Belief in a multiverse is more reasonable then belief in God. People just want to believe in God.

See what I did there? This is not a valid argument.

The reality is religion is not driven completely by logic and has many elements to it that require faith. Hence why it falls into an area of thinking called theology and not into the scientific area of thought.

That is alright. Humans aren't by nature completely logical (thankfully) and its perfectly acceptable in the post-modernist world we live in to believe in whatever the hell you want aslong as you aren't breaking the rules that your society creates in order to function.

Feel free to continue to try and create a scientific model for God, if you guys ever get it right the scientific community will listen. But so far creationists haven't been successful. Sure scientists don't get it right all the time either, but ignorance about the universe in certain areas doesn't necessarily imply that God did it. Do you really want your God to become the God of the gaps? Isn't that a disservice to him?

Why is it so bad to admit that your religion requires faith? Admit it and move on. But you need to accept that not everyone will follow.



jv103 on 15 February 2009

Quick question - What the fuck does the origin of the universe have to do with evolution?

I'm pretty certain that observable evolution, has nothing to do with the origin of the universe. I'm just wondering how some people are saying evolution is invalid because it doesn't explain the origin of the universe.

If I show someone that kinetic energy is demonstrable by rolling it down hill, does it matter where the bowling ball came from -i.e. if it was made in china or the U.S. (besides price)

I just don't see how the topic shifted.