GOD IS DEAD

Will that be after you have finished with your How are those bears? Piece of advice, my friend. To avoid looking like a complete prick, you should ensure your own English is perfect before criticising another's simple typo...

What's wrong with that? To me that sounds like a quote from the bible - the snake is talking, the bear is speculating... Maybe you just mis-understood him.

Is that why we've named a market condition after him? It's all starting to make sense...

Bertot writes:Cavediver writesIt was just a joke Moron, ha, ha. Ill try and do better Dad. Besides all of this I am a Vikings fan, which is just as about as bad, even if they are in the same conference.
Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

Agobot writes:Well like the situation with Rahvin, I am waiting for more than assertions and accusations about the manner in which you represented the God of the Bible. Perhaps you can actually formulate an argument, or should I revert back to the statement that got all this going in the first place:Agobot writes: Im still waiting and by the way, dont worry offending me in your reponses, Ive heard and seen much better than you could ever get away with.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.

There is only one way you could win this argument - you have to prove that "Meaning can spontaneously arise out of nonsense" and you will win the argument. Let me know when you prove that in an experiment. Eternal universe damn it!.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

Not sure I've ever seen so many assertions and so little evidence. Let's start with your core proposition: So looking at this entire Universe of ours, you say there can be only two conclusions - either it, the entire Universe, has always existed; or, something other than the Universe with 'intelligence' 'created' the entire Universe; where 'intelligence' and 'created' are concepts that as far as we are otherwise aware, apply almost solely to some ape-like creatures on a small planet orbiting a dull star, in the outer reaches of a very average galaxy.Would you like to provide the logic that results in your assertion. I'm assuming you are going to demonstrate that the Hartle-Hawking No-Boundary Proposal is impossible? Are you confident that such a proof applies outside of a mini-Superspace argument, or are you using a full non-perturbative approach?Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.

CD writes:Ill try and get to this in a while.
Thanks for stating your proposition, I thought it was going to be about God directly , but ok.D Bertot

AB writes:As before I see nothing here to respond to directly and I have no idea what you mean by "meaning". If possibly you could elaborate on what your specific point is, we could continue. Did you mean "prove that, meaning "CAN'T" spontaneously arise out of nonsense"?D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.

You don't understand what I said because you the religious ones do not like science. In psysics there was an experiment that shows more or less that matter can arise out of nothing. I was commenting on the bible that if you want to win the argument that there is god and it's the biblical one, you'd have to prove that "meaning could spontaneously arise of nonsense". Because everything in the bible is pure nonsense. Now prove in an experiment that meaning could spontaneously arise out of nonsense, and i'll believe in your biblical god. But hey, you just ruined my joke, fundie . SomeOtherPossibiltyDamnIt!!EDIT: There is an intersting topic coming up about God in the Proposed New Topics section. If you are not closed-minded you might want to check it out.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

Seeing how sensitive christians are towards the term God(see bertot's post 174), I suggest we stop using it and substitute it with any of the following:BigBangDamnItMultiverseDamnItEternalUniverseDamnItAlienCreatorsDamnItSimulationDamnItNoReasonDamnItMultipleBigBangsDamnItSetOfLawsDamnItTheUnknownDamnItItCreatedItselfDamnItWeWillNeverKnowDamnItSomeOtherPossibilityDamnItFeel free to add any substitute for the word god, as long as it remains in the realm of the views of science towards creation.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

Cavediver writes: The logic you request has already been provided in the discussion I was having with Rahvin.Its not my responsibility to demonstrate beyond logic and comonsense what is easily observable and understandable, there are no other choices. If the experiment you are advocating here is the sameone Agobot is advancing above, I would ask you to set it out in a couple of paragraphs in simple language. If we are going to use Agobots verbage, that it "proved matter could arise out of nothing", then I would say such an idea is the imagination desperate individuals looking for any answer but that of God. Can anyone be foolish enough to believe that something can come from nothing? No matter (no pun intended) what is appears to be coming from or not coming from, it came from something other than nothing. There very idea that people that call themselves scientist and the such like would adopt such a position is complete nonsense. When pushed on this point most of them will say, well it was another universe or another demension or something, because they are smart enough to know something does not come from nothing.If this is the theory you are advancing, then yes, I would reject it as nonsense. But present it anyway.AB writes: Why dont I just start calling you the man/person of a thousand assertions and accusations. How do you respond to such a nonsensical statement? Only science gone bad would come to such a nonsensical conclusion. I see even your hesitation in believing in it in your words, "shows more or less". The very idea that something can come form absolute nothingness is absurd beyond any logic or rational thought. I understood what your comment meant, I was simply trying to get you to formulate it into an argument. You believe it is pure nonsense, fine. Simply state why. Closed minded hardly characterizes those of us fundies who stay here and debate. It is interesting though to watch a person such as youself use such terminology, appear, to be fully unaware that they themselves are no more than 'Secular Fundamnetalists'. But you are blind to everything else, so I suppose one more is not going to hurt. Sensitivity should be one of your watchwords, seeing that it takes nothing but a spark to set you off in any direction. Hey, but you keep those, rose colored glasses, tunnel vision goggles and blinders on, they havent helped you in any argument thus far and probably won't in the future.D Bertot

What makes you think this "world" is rational? All the evidence points to your "world" being a complete illusion of the mind. You live in the same world as i do, where there is no "something" and no "nothing". They are one and the same for all science can offer so far. Sorry to burst your bubble. Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

quote:

---

"God is dead" is a famous exclamation by Friedrich Nietzsche, from more than a century ago, describing how the idea and role of god is lost with the advances of science. He saw the emerging crisis and void that'd be left by the departing god on our moral considerations and later on his personage declared "We have killed Him". The death of god is a way of saying that we do not recognise order in the universe any more, that life no longer has any meaning and purpose. Nietzsche believed that the majority of people did not recognize (or refused to acknowledge) this death of God out of the deepest-seated fear. Therefore, when the death did begin to become widely acknowledged, people would despair and nihilism would become rampant. I can see us becoming more and more nihilistic, in a meaningless life, but how do we deal with our descendants? There are an awful lot of people out there that rely on their faith in God to keep on living. If we kill their faith, would they still have the desire to live and bear the hardships of life when they start opening their eyes and realise that we are completely alone in this meaningless, bleak, cold and irrelevant nonsense?

---

A century ago? No, it is the first chapter of the Scripture. While God is absent, people ate too much from the Tree of Science to think that they no longer need God, that they choose to ignore Word of God, or even think that they are God. This way, they will die their second death.Science runs in parallel with spirituality, just like the Tree of Knowledge coexisted with the Tree of Life. Your inclination towards science till giving up God was mentioned long time ago. And bingo, another prophecy just has come true.

Cavediver writes:While 'two apes walking' {Agobot} is suspended could you post a place that I could take a look at this Proposal you mentioned. I am familiar with Hawkin only from the episode of the Simpsons where he is with Homer in the bar and Moe asks,"who is paying for these beers", Homer responds, in Hawkin's box voice, "I am". Hawkins says, "I did not say that", Homer says, "Yes you did". The boxing glove comes out of the wheelchair and hits Homer in the face, now thats funny stuff. Archie Bunker notwithstanding, the those Hebs are very funny, ofcourse I am just kidding there. I had a best friend on a previous job that I referred to as a Heb and he also referred to me as Dago, pasata burping Wap, all of which is very true. Thise were some good times.Anywho, if you could post that I would appreciate it.Thanks Dad.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.