|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 3861 days) Posts: 390 From: Irvine, CA, United States Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Can science say anything about a Creator God? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Just being real Member (Idle past 3964 days) Posts: 369 Joined: |
JBR: Some sort of universes parameters are needed to have a fluctuation
JonF: Really? Please provide references or a proof. JBR: How about you provide me with just one example where the phenomena has been observed apart from the parameters of the universe, and I'll withdraw my comment. Otherwise I cite them all as proof. JonF:Huh? Your message seems to have no relation to the issue. You claimed "Some sort of universes parameters are needed to have a fluctuation". Yes and thats the point. Quantum fluctuations are only known to occur within space that already exists. How would the first universe-generating fluctuation occur without space? And how could that space be there without a universe already in place? Therefore we have only observed (for lack of a better term) quantum fluctuations occur within universal perameters. You asked from proof of that statement. I pointed to all quantum fluctuation experiments ever conducted as that proof Jon. I can say that because they all occured within our current space time universe.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Just being real Member (Idle past 3964 days) Posts: 369 Joined: |
Except that, yes, we do know that the phenomenon is happening everywhere all the time. You still have a very strong skepticism toward what is a well known and well established phenomenon.
You sure have a way of straining at a gnat but yet ignoring the camel, don’t you? Look, my skepticism to whether or not they occur everywhere all the time is inconsequential to the paramount problem of quantum fluctuations only being observed taking place within the parameters of this universe’s already existing time and space. A luxury that the fluctuation which hypothetically created the universe would not have had.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
You asked from proof of that statement. I pointed to all quantum fluctuation experiments ever conducted as that proof Jon. I can say that because they all occured within our current space time universe. If you accept that reasoning, then why not this identical reasoning? Every observed effect ever encountered has been the result of a natural cause. No one has ever traced any effect to a non-natural cause. The universe is a caused effect. Thus the universe resulted from a natural cause. What you are ignoring is that quantum fluctuations are predicted by a theory that suggests that quantum fluctuations do exist in a vacuum of nothing. We have no reason to believe that theory is incorrect, because the theory has passed every verification. In fact, even the term 'universe parameters' is total BS faux science. It has no meaning whatsoever. Why don't you name a 'universe parameter' that you feel is required for quantum fluctuations to exist. What you are saying, in effect, is that you'll never accept indirect evidence for a natural cause of the universe. That's not the same as no evidence, but it's good enough for you. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
JBR writes: Look, my skepticism to whether or not they occur everywhere all the time is inconsequential to the paramount problem of quantum fluctuations only being observed taking place within the parameters of this universe’s already existing time and space. Well it would be quite an achievement for us to observe something outisde of time and space........ But the fact remains that quantum fluctuation have been observed whilst creator gods haven't. 1 - 0 to the fluctuations.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Just being real Member (Idle past 3964 days) Posts: 369 Joined: |
Every observed effect ever encountered has been the result of a natural cause Is the computer in front of you a natural cause? Or is it an intelligent cause? What about a bird's nest? Natural or intelligent? How about drift wood lined out on the beach of an island that spells "Marooned Please Send Help" ? The materials are all natural forming but are their specified arrangements natural or intelligent? Obviously the correct answer here is intelligent. Thus every effect ever encountered has not been the result of a natural cause. This means the rest of your house built upon the sinking sands of this faulty premise is doomed to collapse my friend.
What you are ignoring is that quantum fluctuations are predicted by a theory that suggests that quantum fluctuations do exist in a vacuum of nothing. We have no reason to believe that theory is incorrect, because the theory has passed every verification How can it have passed anything? It is completely untestable. Unless you know of a way to leave time and space and run tests that I'm unaware of. All quantum fluctuations ever detected have occurred in time and space. In order for one to happen outside of time and space it would have to first be capable of creating its own time and space to fluctuate in to. We have no observations to suggest this is even a possibility. Virtual particles are produced from space-time not from nothing. Not to even mention the fact that all of this assumes the pre-existence of the laws of physics in order for a quantum fluctuation to occur. How could these laws have preceded that event?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Just being real Member (Idle past 3964 days) Posts: 369 Joined: |
But the fact remains that quantum fluctuation have been observed whilst creator gods haven't. Actually quantum fluctuations have never been "observed" Straggler. They are unobservable. What we have observed are their effects. We have never observed air either. It is invisible to our eyes. But we sure have observed its effects. Likewise just because we have never observed God doesn't mean we can't detect His effects. And I think that these effects are clearly and scientifically detectable. All one needs do is look for specified information where the only possible ramification is that it was formed by a supremely intelligent being. i.e...laws of physics, the arrangement of the cosmos, the parameters of our solar system and planet to support life, the specified code in DNA etc...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
left open tag which apparently deletes text
Edited by NoNukes, : bad dupe removedUnder a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
We have never observed air either. It is invisible to our eyes. But we sure have observed its effects. So then the fact that we don't see quantum fluctuations is of no consequence. And neither is the fact that we cannot see beyond our own universe.
And I think that these effects are clearly and scientifically detectable. All one needs do is look for specified information where the only possible ramification is that it was formed by a supremely intelligent being And backing up that 'I think' with some evidence or logical argument is the point of the thread. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Is the computer in front of you a natural cause? Or is it an intelligent cause? What about a bird's nest? Natural or intelligent? I suppose I did leave this opening. The computer in front of me is of natural origins versus super natural origins. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Is the computer in front of you a natural cause? Or is it an intelligent cause? What about a bird's nest? Natural or intelligent? I suppose I did leave this opening. The computer in front of me is of natural origins versus super natural origins. It was not produced by a Creator God, said origin being the subject of this thread. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9512 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
JBR writes: Is the computer in front of you a natural cause? Put it the other way - did it have a supernatural cause? Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
The obvious disparity here is that quantum field theory is one of the most successful scientific theories ever devised. It has demonstrated itself able to make predictions which have led to new discoveries. The ability of QFT to accurately predict experimental results has been described as comparable to determining the distance from Boston to Pasadena to within the thickness of a human hair.
What has your "goddidit" hypothesis ever led to the discovery of? If the answer to that is "nothing" why do you think we should even put the two things in the same ballpark of credence?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
What has your "goddidit" hypothesis ever led to the discovery of? If I understand designtheorist's intent for these threads, his plan was to show us that RTB made better predictions of future discoveries than did naturalistic creation theories. But he has not managed to get around to that yet. And predictions of future science is not the same thing as actually finding future science anyway. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Straggler writes: What has your "goddidit" hypothesis ever led to the discovery of? I feel that I have witnessed confirmation both pro and con in regards to belief ideologies, mental health and illness, and cultural bias. It is evident that we are in the midst of a war between cultures, ideologies, and ways of life. To me, God sent His Son to fix the imperfections but I can also see that critics would logically assert that religious beliefs are often the cause of strife and war. Scientifically, I can really prove nothing along these lines.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2506 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
Just being real writes: Likewise just because we have never observed God doesn't mean we can't detect His effects. And I think that these effects are clearly and scientifically detectable. All one needs do is look for specified information where the only possible ramification is that it was formed by a supremely intelligent being. i.e...laws of physics, the arrangement of the cosmos, the parameters of our solar system and planet to support life, the specified code in DNA etc... (1) Why do any of the things you've listed require a "supremely intelligent being"? (2) Are you suggesting that miracles (lawless magic) would be evidence against a physical law making god? (3) What force, if any, constrains your god to create a world with the physical regularities that we call laws? (4) What laws, if any, would your god be subject to? (5) If he is not subject to any constraints (laws) then how can the hypothesis "God created the world" make any predictions about the world? (6) Wouldn't any world of any description be compatible with the hypothesis? (7) If (6) then how could observations of this world provide evidence for a creator god? (8) If you think that the the DNA code cannot come about by the physical processes of this world, do you also think that your god made the world with the wrong type of physical nature for our type of life? (9) In your opinion, did it require a miracle (law breaking) to bring about DNA based life?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024