Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Question About the Universe
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(1)
Message 166 of 373 (740666)
11-06-2014 2:53 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by zaius137
11-05-2014 11:49 AM


Re: Science is evidence for God
Anyone can speculate about phenomena. It is not the evidence that is contestable (real evidence) it is the interpretation.
But there you are, contesting the validity of evidence by claim that some is not 'real' evidence...
For instance there is at least 300 cosmologies that provide adequate explanation for the existence of the universe without using dark energy or dark matter.
And I'm sure they all merit equal attention...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by zaius137, posted 11-05-2014 11:49 AM zaius137 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by zaius137, posted 11-06-2014 9:20 PM edge has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 167 of 373 (740697)
11-06-2014 8:53 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by Coragyps
11-04-2014 8:57 PM


This might need a different thread, but could you give an example or two of archaeological discoveries that correspond...etc.? Atheist little me thought it was fairly cool when C13 dating on the Tunnel of Siloam matched up with historical dating. Do you have any more examples?
In what ways have the discoveries of ARCHEOLOGY verified the reliability of the Bible? - ChristianAnswers.Net
There's a lot out there, though I'm not sure how much of it is contested by the scientific community. I agree that it's probably another thread, so I'd rather not say anymore about it here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Coragyps, posted 11-04-2014 8:57 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 168 of 373 (740699)
11-06-2014 9:07 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by nwr
11-04-2014 11:49 PM


I guess I should take that as an admission that no, you cannot provide the logic.
You cannot demand that I fill supply what's missing, because it was your claim.
You and I just have different definitions of what's logical, I guess. My time is limited, I can't go off on tangents that I'm not really interested in, especially when I"m (as usual) facing a gang.
There have been a number of people who have said that they are spiritual but not religious. I'm not at all sure what that is supposed to mean.
Neither am I, I've never been directly confronted by "spiritual atheism", or "spiritual science" in the many hundreds of opponents I've had in discussions like these over the years. I'm not sure if it's a new talking point among atheists/scientists or not - could be open for some big new discussions!
I think, for some people, "spiritual" refers to the human spirit. So people who are not economic materialists, who value friendships and relations, might claim that they are spiritual.
I've always thought of "spiritual" as referring to some form of the supernatural, completely disconnected from testability and proveability and all of that, but the word may be more slippery than I thought - I may stand correction on it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by nwr, posted 11-04-2014 11:49 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 169 of 373 (740701)
11-06-2014 9:19 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by PaulK
11-05-2014 2:16 AM


In other words, to you, the germ theory of disease was an example of science "dismissing spirituality".
By your standards, Pre-Columbian archaeology "dismisses spirituality" by daring to contradict the Book of Mormon.
Well no, I never mentioned germ theory, and I don't even believe in the Book of Mormon. I was just referring to the general way that the scientific community has always gone after Christianity, particularly the book of Genesis.
Of course in reality it is entirely possible to be spiritual while disagreeing with other people's "spiritual" views - although I have to wonder just how "spiritual" they really are if they're largely about the material world.
I agree, I wonder if the word "spiritual" is the proper word to describe humanistic meditations and other secular philosophies.
Do you, for instance, refuse to take a position on the age of the universe to avoid contradicting the spiritual beliefs of Hindu ?
I care nothing about Hindu - I refuse to take a position on the age of the earth because I'm not interested in that subject. My position on it doesn't affect my life, and the word of God doesn't address it.
Or do you "dismiss spirituality" by refusing to "respect" those beliefs ?
If I take no firm position on it (no position on it can be proven) then I'm not disrespecting anyone's beliefs.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by PaulK, posted 11-05-2014 2:16 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by PaulK, posted 11-07-2014 12:24 AM marc9000 has replied
 Message 182 by Percy, posted 11-07-2014 7:12 AM marc9000 has replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 3409 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 170 of 373 (740702)
11-06-2014 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 166 by edge
11-06-2014 2:53 PM


Re: Science is evidence for God
Good post... Cheers!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by edge, posted 11-06-2014 2:53 PM edge has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 171 of 373 (740703)
11-06-2014 9:26 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by Tangle
11-05-2014 5:51 AM


You've got it from what's inside your head. For instance, Sam Harris has been writing about spiritualism and morality for years - he meditates and has studies Buddhism. He's also just published this book:
quote:
I have been waiting for more than a decade to write Waking Up.
As I said, I've never been confronted with atheistic or scientific spirituality. Harris "has been waiting for more than a decade" - did he initiate the spirituality thing among secularists? Is this a new thing for Harris and Dawkins followers? As far as I know Harris specialty is more atheism than science, did he start this and the scientific community quickly jump on board? That wouldn't surprise me, the scientific community seems to quickly pick up on what atheists do, and vice-versa. Again, this could spawn all sorts of new topic proposals, but my time is limited these days.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by Tangle, posted 11-05-2014 5:51 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by Tangle, posted 11-07-2014 3:38 AM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 172 of 373 (740704)
11-06-2014 9:39 PM
Reply to: Message 156 by Percy
11-05-2014 7:23 AM


Spirituality is not synonymous with belief in God.
But I'm still not convinced that "spirituality" is the proper word for anything that can be falsified or tested.
Yeah, right. There's as much a body that controls science as one that controls religion.
I can't go along with that - there's no "national academy of religion", that has peer review or anything like it. (in the U.S. at least) science is a subject that can be "established", as one example, taught as fact in public schools. There are organizations that largely control what is taught. One religion can't haul another religion into court and legally shout it down, like the scientific community did with Intelligent design.
Why don't you get on plumber's and electrician manuals for not showing respect for "spiritual or moral laws." It would make as much sense.
There are no best selling books out called "Plumbings Dangerous Idea", or "How Electircal Current Shows That God Does Not Exist", though I should probably be careful, Sam Harris might get some ideas, take a crash course in those subjects, and try to write books with those titles. The problem is, they wouldn't become best sellers, because those subjects aren't taught with an atheist bent like todays' science is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by Percy, posted 11-05-2014 7:23 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 183 by Percy, posted 11-07-2014 7:42 AM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 173 of 373 (740705)
11-06-2014 9:44 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by NoNukes
11-05-2014 10:47 AM


It is instead religious dogma, held by a minority of the people on earth, that creates the fairly laughable position you exhibit here and in any number of other threads.
I just enjoy watching the dances, the way the scientific followers snap back and fourth between being a "disinterested pursuit of knowledge", to "weakening the hold of religion", and trying to distance themselves from one or the other, depending on the argument. Quite laughable.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by NoNukes, posted 11-05-2014 10:47 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by PaulK, posted 11-07-2014 12:27 AM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 180 by NoNukes, posted 11-07-2014 5:12 AM marc9000 has not replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 3409 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 174 of 373 (740706)
11-06-2014 9:51 PM


The hand of God
The age of the universe is ~13.4 billion years, yet we can view objects as far as 47 billion light years away. That proposition is based on the current expanding universe, which relies on dark energy, which relies on a hypothetical form of energy. The density of dark energy (1.67 10−27 kg/m3) is very low (wiki) it has two popular hypothetical possibilities: quintessence and a cosmological constant, the latter was disavowed by Einstein.
Is quintessence the hand of God?

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by Coyote, posted 11-06-2014 10:03 PM zaius137 has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 175 of 373 (740710)
11-06-2014 10:03 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by zaius137
11-06-2014 9:51 PM


Re: The hand of God
The age of the universe is ~13.4 billion years, yet we can view objects as far as 47 billion light years away.
A google search does not show objects being observed 47 billion light years away.
Perhaps you can find a source for that claim?
And in any case, all of those numbers are greater than 6,000 years, which is what you seem to be trying to document in other posts.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by zaius137, posted 11-06-2014 9:51 PM zaius137 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 184 by Percy, posted 11-07-2014 7:47 AM Coyote has not replied
 Message 186 by zaius137, posted 11-08-2014 3:13 AM Coyote has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 176 of 373 (740718)
11-07-2014 12:24 AM
Reply to: Message 169 by marc9000
11-06-2014 9:19 PM


quote:
Well no, I never mentioned germ theory, and I don't even believe in the Book of Mormon. I was just referring to the general way that the scientific community has always gone after Christianity, particularly the book of Genesis.
In other words "respecting spirituality" only refers to respecting YOUR beliefs. Which include things which can be "measured and tested" and therefore by your words below probably shouldn't be counted as "spiritual" at all.
Science has not especially gone after Christianity. A branch of Christianity (to use a loose definition of Christianity) is going after science because it objects to the discoveries science has made.
quote:
I agree, I wonder if the word "spiritual" is the proper word to describe humanistic meditations and other secular philosophies.
And yet they obviously fit the concept of spirituality much better than the age of the Earth, for instance.
quote:
I care nothing about Hindu - I refuse to take a position on the age of the earth because I'm not interested in that subject. My position on it doesn't affect my life, and the word of God doesn't address it.
And yet it is a good example of scientists disagreeing with "Christian" views. And often presented as an example of scientists "going after Christianity".
I think we can say that the idea that if scientists did not "dismiss spirituality" they would give special respect to YOUR views is so obviously false that even you can see it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by marc9000, posted 11-06-2014 9:19 PM marc9000 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 206 by marc9000, posted 11-08-2014 8:34 PM PaulK has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 177 of 373 (740719)
11-07-2014 12:27 AM
Reply to: Message 173 by marc9000
11-06-2014 9:44 PM


So you just enjoy lying about people who dare to prove you wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by marc9000, posted 11-06-2014 9:44 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 178 of 373 (740722)
11-07-2014 3:38 AM
Reply to: Message 171 by marc9000
11-06-2014 9:26 PM


marc writes:
As I said, I've never been confronted with atheistic or scientific spirituality. Harris "has been waiting for more than a decade" - did he initiate the spirituality thing among secularists? Is this a new thing for Harris and Dawkins followers? As far as I know Harris specialty is more atheism than science, did he start this and the scientific community quickly jump on board? That wouldn't surprise me, the scientific community seems to quickly pick up on what atheists do, and vice-versa. Again, this could spawn all sorts of new topic proposals, but my time is limited these days.
No, you said that atheists dismiss spirituality and gave us a list of those you've studied that have done so.
I'm pointing out to you that a) you're wrong, b) that I don't belive you've read a thing any of them have written beyond snippets from creationist nonsense and c) that Sam Harris has always thought that spirituality is an important part of human life and culture.
You're making up stuff you prefer to believe about atheists - as you have just done in your reply above. Be honest with yourself.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by marc9000, posted 11-06-2014 9:26 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 179 of 373 (740725)
11-07-2014 5:04 AM
Reply to: Message 161 by zaius137
11-06-2014 11:42 AM


Re: Big Bang or Big fraud
The big bang has become so ad-hoc that it is now a tautology amongst scientists.
Do you actually think this statement has any meaningful content? Do you know what ad-hoc means?

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by zaius137, posted 11-06-2014 11:42 AM zaius137 has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 180 of 373 (740726)
11-07-2014 5:12 AM
Reply to: Message 173 by marc9000
11-06-2014 9:44 PM


I just enjoy watching the dances, the way the scientific followers snap back and fourth between being a "disinterested pursuit of knowledge", to "weakening the hold of religion", and trying to distance themselves from one or the other, depending on the argument. Quite laughable.
Seriously, dude. Nobody gives a hoot about what you believe when they peer through a telescope and write down what they see. Your belief otherwise is just paranoia.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by marc9000, posted 11-06-2014 9:44 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024