Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 108 (8739 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-01-2017 2:18 AM
396 online now:
DrJones*, PaulK, vimesey (3 members, 393 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jayhawker Soule
Upcoming Birthdays: AdminAsgara
Post Volume:
Total: 805,931 Year: 10,537/21,208 Month: 19/3,605 Week: 167/873 Day: 19/148 Hour: 0/5

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
891011
12
13Next
Author Topic:   What is design? Can we not find evidence of design on earth or in the universe?
Agobot
Member (Idle past 2916 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 166 of 185 (486863)
10-25-2008 5:14 AM
Reply to: Message 159 by onifre
10-24-2008 7:12 PM


onifre writes:

Yes, thats all great to think about, but it was not its purpose. If it was its purpose then the universe would have needed to guild every step of the evolutionary process that lead to us. If the huge asteroid(or whatever it was) that struck the Earth 65Mya doesn't hit, the dinos continue their dominance, and man never comes to be. So we are lucky to be here, witnessing life from a conscous PoV, we are lucky to be able to study the universe, we are lucky to have adapted intelligence that helps us do this, we are lucky that no other cosmic event has whipped us out...shit we are lucky an asteroid hit Earth and killed off the other dominant species. Simply put, we are lucky that the random events that lead to our emergence from the trees took place, and yes its really fuckin cool to be able to step back and stare at our mother universe in wonder, but not in arogance like we deserve this. We got lucky, yay us!

That's what it looks like, but i don't subscribe to it. Maybe the creators left everything to chance after setting the initial conditions and laws, like Stephen Hawking suggests. Or maybe as Einstein says - coincidence is how god remains anonymous. How else would you explain energy turning to consciousness that's aware of the presence of energy that forms other consciousness continuously? Natural process? Then what would be supernatural? Is there such a thing at all? If we go down this path, it might turn out that what i consider a higher intelligence(or god for short) is quite natural to you, sitting somewhere and calculating what laws would allow the universe to unfold and support conscious life. The fact that we have been able to continuously progress is very puzzling as well. We came to being and we saw that S=v.t, but why is it so? What laid down those laws that we could discover and put to good use? How would we progress and develop intelligence and consciousness if there were no inherent laws for us to discover?

Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.


"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind" - A.Einstein

"I am a deeply religious nonbeliever - This is a somewhat new kind of religion" - Albert Einstein

"Matter is nothing but the harmonies created by this vibrating string..The laws of physics can be compared to the laws of harmony allowed on the string. The universe itself, composed of countless vibrating strings, would then be comparable to a symphony." - Michio Kaku


This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by onifre, posted 10-24-2008 7:12 PM onifre has not yet responded

    
Agobot
Member (Idle past 2916 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 167 of 185 (486865)
10-25-2008 6:12 AM


Just so we can have more creationist on this debate, would my idea of transcending our physical existence mean a death to you? Can consciousness be reduced to digital information - 0 and 1's? Do you feel a digital copy of you will be different to you, considering that the theists believe in the existence of the soul?

Would a theist ever allow to be teleported? Could the soul be teleported and represented digitally?

I can see theists rejecting being teleported in the future based on their belief in the soul.


"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind" - A.Einstein

"I am a deeply religious nonbeliever - This is a somewhat new kind of religion" - Albert Einstein

"Matter is nothing but the harmonies created by this vibrating string..The laws of physics can be compared to the laws of harmony allowed on the string. The universe itself, composed of countless vibrating strings, would then be comparable to a symphony." - Michio Kaku


    
Agobot
Member (Idle past 2916 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 168 of 185 (486868)
10-25-2008 7:25 AM
Reply to: Message 162 by onifre
10-24-2008 11:39 PM


Re: Atheism
I've just thanked the universe for having the physical laws it has, that allowed the emergence of such great beer as Heineken. Thank you Universe and singuarity! HAHA

Edit: But we humans are an integral part of the singularity, so whom are we thanking really? The nothingness?

Hey God, why did you create such a mess?

Onifre asking the same question - Hey natural process, why did you create such a mess? :)

Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.


"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind" - A.Einstein

"I am a deeply religious nonbeliever - This is a somewhat new kind of religion" - Albert Einstein

"Matter is nothing but the harmonies created by this vibrating string..The laws of physics can be compared to the laws of harmony allowed on the string. The universe itself, composed of countless vibrating strings, would then be comparable to a symphony." - Michio Kaku


This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by onifre, posted 10-24-2008 11:39 PM onifre has not yet responded

    
onifre
Member (Idle past 337 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 169 of 185 (486874)
10-25-2008 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 163 by New Cat's Eye
10-25-2008 4:20 AM


Re: Atheism
Yo Catholic Sci,

You should have said sentience, remember?

I do, I was just trying to bring you out of hiding. :P


This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-25-2008 4:20 AM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

    
1.61803
Member
Posts: 2674
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 170 of 185 (486906)
10-25-2008 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by Agobot
10-25-2008 5:00 AM


Re: Atheism
Hello,
quote:
However I am aware that you are not a meaningless combination of atoms. You say it's natural, because that suits your belief and you want to wave off the question why we are fighting entropy.
All I can say is that there may or may not be a reason. I do not know the answer, nobody does. If you insist you know the answer thats fine, but it does not convince. I for one derive meaning from my life. I do not assign meaning to why or how the universe came to be as it is. Because I do not know the answer to those questions. I do not want to insist that the evidence of incredible complexity of the universe is undeniable proof of design or designer. I ok with that, your not so we disagree. But your certainty does not trump my skepticism.

quote:
BTW we need to establish what we consider a natural cause? Does miracle constitute natural cause? Is the singularity natural?

Everything that exist in nature is natural as far as I am concerned. Because if it exist in our universe then how can it be otherwise?
Something that exist outside our cosmos is supernatural, and who knows maybe such things exist, but if it does exist outside the cosmos how are we able to decern it? Primitive man once thought many things where supernatural. Fire, Lightening etc.
quote:
Is the earth natural, considering that it's nothing but 100% empty space? What exactly is "natural" outside of our silly debate where everyone is twisting science to suit his beliefs?
The Earth is natural. It is composed of atoms as well and has mass and gravity and is not empty space. If you believe the Earth is nothing but empty space fine, but your wrong. Look up the Higgs field and Higgs boson to find out why things obtain mass. And yes I am aware the particle and associated field has not been found yet. I am also aware the graviton has not been discovered yet either. But we have mass and occupy spacetime trust me on that one.:D Or maybe we are in the clutches of Descartes demon.
quote:
What does the quantum world have to do with life and consciousness?

Short answer, everything. Example if the electrons and atoms of the microtubuals on the flagellum of your fathers spermatazoa suddenly decayed before fertilization, you would not be concious now. You would not be here reading this. Everything affects everything. Quantum events within the sun {nuclear fusion} create He from H and the Photons from the sun are inevitably responsible life evolving on Earth. Unless of course your a creationist then the answer is much simpler.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Agobot, posted 10-25-2008 5:00 AM Agobot has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by Agobot, posted 10-25-2008 12:56 PM 1.61803 has responded

  
Agobot
Member (Idle past 2916 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 171 of 185 (486908)
10-25-2008 12:56 PM
Reply to: Message 170 by 1.61803
10-25-2008 12:40 PM


Re: Atheism
1.61... writes:

Everything that exist in nature is natural as far as I am concerned. Because if it exist in our universe then how can it be otherwise?
Something that exist outside our cosmos is supernatural, and who knows maybe such things exist, but if it does exist outside the cosmos how are we able to decern it? Primitive man once thought many things where supernatural. Fire, Lightening etc.

Everything that exists in nature is a very vague definition. If you read on some forum that there is another earth with dinosaurs would it be natural? Would an invisible object be natural?

1.61... writes:

The Earth is natural. It is composed of atoms as well and has mass and gravity and is not empty space. If you believe the Earth is nothing but empty space fine, but your wrong. Look up the Higgs field and Higgs boson to find out why things obtain mass.

Who has seen a higgs boson? God?

You have no idea how wrong you are on earth being not empty space. Do you know what gives matter the impression of solidness? Judging by your response I think you don't. When you find that out, you may start to see why the brightest minds like einsten, hawking, schrodinger, m.kaku, etc. atart talking about god.
What has mass got to do with solidness?? Have you seen E=mc^2? Does energy have mass?

Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.


"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind" - A.Einstein

"I am a deeply religious nonbeliever - This is a somewhat new kind of religion" - Albert Einstein

"Matter is nothing but the harmonies created by this vibrating string..The laws of physics can be compared to the laws of harmony allowed on the string. The universe itself, composed of countless vibrating strings, would then be comparable to a symphony." - Michio Kaku


This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by 1.61803, posted 10-25-2008 12:40 PM 1.61803 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by 1.61803, posted 10-25-2008 9:00 PM Agobot has responded

    
1.61803
Member
Posts: 2674
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 172 of 185 (486942)
10-25-2008 9:00 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by Agobot
10-25-2008 12:56 PM


Re: Atheism
quote:
Everything that exists in nature is a very vague definition. If you read on some forum that there is another earth with dinosaurs would it be natural? Would an invisible object be natural?

I thought I had responded adequatley to this. So I will simply say I think that the universe is a natural process. Maybe it is not. But I think it is, and since I do then I think the formation of galaxies and planets and life are natural processes as well. And if another planet supports other life that will be natural as well since it is occuring in our cosmos. Everything that exist is part of the cosmos.
If you can refute that go ahead and try. Time did not even exist until the big bang. If God does indeed exist then it will be the only exception since God is a self existance, undifferentiated, uncreated reality. Supernatural. At least according to the Angelic Doctor. I kind of liked his definitions of God.:)

quote:
Who has seen a higgs boson? God?
?

quote:
You have no idea how wrong you are on earth being not empty space. Do you know what gives matter the impression of solidness?

I thought that the temperature and energy states of atoms was responsible for which state matter takes..gas,solid, liquid, plasma.
And then of course gravity. I thought it was the Higgs field allows for matter to clump allowing for things to be things. Do you have some more recent information?

quote:
Judging by your response I think you don't.
Hmmmm. See my above response.

quote:
When you find that out, you may start to see why the brightest minds like einsten, hawking, schrodinger, m.kaku, etc. atart talking about god.
All athiest, if you are arguing from authority at least find some belivers. :D
quote:
What has mass got to do with solidness?? Have you seen E=mc^2? Does energy have mass?
Energy is the radiation emitted when mass is converted to energy using the c2 conversion factor in special relativity equations, whether it be relativistic or total energy being describe. So energy as photons have no mass. So what, the only time that formula is cranked for real is in singularitys,the center of stars, and nuclear reactors and weapons. Let me guess, you think because matter on a quantum level is really nothing then our existence is dependant on God. Okee dokee. I have been looking into this shit a long time dude. I am more moved to the possibilty of God when I see a babys smile, or a sunrise. I respect fundalmentalist more than ID'ers. If your gonna have a God, have a big one.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by Agobot, posted 10-25-2008 12:56 PM Agobot has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by Agobot, posted 10-26-2008 5:03 AM 1.61803 has responded

  
Agobot
Member (Idle past 2916 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 173 of 185 (486948)
10-26-2008 5:03 AM
Reply to: Message 172 by 1.61803
10-25-2008 9:00 PM


Re: Atheism
Agobot writes:

Everything that exists in nature is a very vague definition. If you read on some forum that there is another earth with dinosaurs would it be natural? Would an invisible object be natural?

1.61... writes:

I thought I had responded adequatley to this. So I will simply say I think that the universe is a natural process.

Then what is a natural process? Is consciousness arising from energy a natural process?

Agobot writes:

another earth with dinosaurs would it be natural?

1.61... writes:

And if another planet supports other life that will be natural as well since it is occuring in our cosmos. Everything that exist is part of the cosmos.

I was talking about another earth that you cannot see that might still be full of dinosaurs that we have decohered from 65 mln. years ago. You don't even understand what i am saying, because you try to use everyday common sense where common sense is irrelevant and you are lagging behind the findings of modern physics.

Agobot writes:

You have no idea how wrong you are on earth being not empty space. Do you know what gives matter the impression of solidness?

1.61... writes:

I thought that the temperature and energy states of atoms was responsible for which state matter takes..gas,solid, liquid, plasma.
And then of course gravity. I thought it was the Higgs field allows for matter to clump allowing for things to be things. Do you have some more recent information?

You have no idea what you're talking about. And you clearly don't have any idea what matter is. Do you think it's a coincidence that only you of all the users on EvC, have issues with matter being 100% empty space? Do you think no one else is reading this thread? Or you think everyone else is plain stupid and they take for granted everything is say?

Agobot writes:

When you find that out, you may start to see why the brightest minds like einsten, hawking, schrodinger, m.kaku, etc. atart talking about god.

1.61... writes:

All athiest, if you are arguing from authority at least find some belivers.

Einstein atheist? Have you seen the quotes in my sig? This isn't the humour thread.

"In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views" -A.Einstein

If you claim Einstein was an atheist toward the god of the bible, he was. But we are all atheists then, since there are 34 000 religions with different gods and we no one believes in all those 34 000 gods at the same time. I'll take what you said above as a refreshing joke.

I suggest you do your homework on M.Kaku, S.Hawking, etc. before you start your humourous claims on god.

1.61... writes:

What has mass got to do with solidness?? Have you seen E=mc^2? Does energy have mass?

1.61... writes:

Energy is the radiation emitted when mass is converted to energy using the c2 conversion factor in special relativity equations, whether it be relativistic or total energy being describe. So energy as photons have no mass. So what, the only time that formula is cranked for real is in singularitys,the center of stars, and nuclear reactors and weapons.

What are you talking about?? I asked you a very simple question - Does energy have mass? If you can't answer this, don't pretend you know what you're talking about.

If you have been into this shit a long time, why did you claim this:

"If you believe the Earth is nothing but empty space fine, but your wrong."

Were you joking when you made that claim that i was wrong? Do you think this is the humour thread? Or are you joking now when you claim:

"I have been looking into this shit a long time dude"

What is so funny about holding conflicting opinions?

1.61... writes:

Let me guess, you think because matter on a quantum level is really nothing then our existence is dependant on God.

What is it dependent upon? Your common sense? How does your everyday logic and common sense explain positive and negative charges turning to consciousness? I have a feeling your answer to this will put the final touches of a very hilarious thread.

Agobot writes:

Who has seen a higgs boson? God?

1.61... writes:

?

Are you coming from the future via a time machine? Because if you are not, your claims are hilarious.

Also, do you know why the Higgs boson is dubbed the God partilce?

Nobel laureate Leon Lederman labeled it the theoretical boson "the God particle" years ago because its discovery could unify understanding of particle physics and help humans "know the mind of God." And when world famous physicists start talking of God, they are not talking of the God of the church(whether it's big or small as you say- HAHA).

1.61... writes:

If your gonna have a God, have a big one.

HAHA

Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.


"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind" - A.Einstein

"I am a deeply religious nonbeliever - This is a somewhat new kind of religion" - Albert Einstein

"Matter is nothing but the harmonies created by this vibrating string..The laws of physics can be compared to the laws of harmony allowed on the string. The universe itself, composed of countless vibrating strings, would then be comparable to a symphony." - Michio Kaku


This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by 1.61803, posted 10-25-2008 9:00 PM 1.61803 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by 1.61803, posted 10-26-2008 10:23 AM Agobot has responded

    
Agobot
Member (Idle past 2916 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 174 of 185 (486956)
10-26-2008 8:08 AM
Reply to: Message 152 by bluescat48
10-24-2008 5:56 PM


Re: Atheism
Agobot writes:

First RNA --> Single cell organism --> Multicellular organism --> Fish --> Reptile --> Mammal --> Ape --> Hominid --> Homo sapiens --> ...

bluescat48 writes:

I'll give 2 possibilities:

1) Something similar but different enough that it can't mate with Homo sapiens
2) extinction.

I used to be very negative towards your country's policy in Iraq. It once got to the point that it was starting to mess with my ability to communicate with Americans. Then it stroke me... what if all the oil is exhasuted by the year 2025 and we have not come up with an alternative fuel? The world would enter into an energy war over the last remaining drops of oil. I think someone from your country is considering the possibility that at least a portion of the population of the globe might become extinct, if we do not find a new energy source. As prof.Michio Kaku says, the transition from Level 0 civilisation to Level 1 is the most dangerous. If you think it's creepy, it really is. There are so many nuclear weapons nowadays, just Russia has near 7000 nuclear warheads. I am scared, anyone who is not, they just don't realise what is going to happen when the oil wells begin to dry out(and if we have not found a replacement energy source by then). So now i don't blame your country for invading Iraq any more, i think your government is preparing for the worst case scenario. I am just scared by the possibility of a war for the last remaining oil leading to the second possibility that you've listed. It's true that there will always be newly found smaller fields, but the cost for their extraction might sky rocket and again lead to a war. Currently about 90% of all world transport uses oil and some pessimists insist that we stop using oil for transport immediately, so that we can use it for more impending needs like medicines, furniture, communication, etc.

As a leaked suppressed report by the US defense ministry stated, "Once again, warfare would define human life". This i find a much bigger threat than terrorism. And as einstein said:

"I do not know with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."

Let's just hope there will be no world war over remaining energy supplies but then what is your country preparing for with the missile shield in Poland and the Czech republic that angered so much Russia?

Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.


"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind" - A.Einstein

"I am a deeply religious nonbeliever - This is a somewhat new kind of religion" - Albert Einstein

"Matter is nothing but the harmonies created by this vibrating string..The laws of physics can be compared to the laws of harmony allowed on the string. The universe itself, composed of countless vibrating strings, would then be comparable to a symphony." - Michio Kaku


This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by bluescat48, posted 10-24-2008 5:56 PM bluescat48 has not yet responded

    
1.61803
Member
Posts: 2674
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 175 of 185 (486962)
10-26-2008 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 173 by Agobot
10-26-2008 5:03 AM


Re: Atheism
(A) Einstien was a athiest. true or false

Main Entry: ATHEIST !A-thE-ist http://plus.aol.com/aol/dictionary?query=atheist&flv=1&icid=rbox_reference_tools.M
Pronunciation: \ ˈā-thē-ist \
Function: noun
Results
one who believes that there is no deity

Main Entry: DEITY http://plus.aol.com/aol/dictionary/deity&invocationType=dictionary.suggestions

Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural de·i·ties,
Etymology: Middle English deitee, from Anglo-French deité, from Late Latin deitat-, deitas, from Latin deus god; akin to Old English Tīw, god of war, Latin divus god, dies day, Greek dios heavenly, Sanskrit deva heavenly, god
Date: 14th century
Results
1 a. 1 a the rank or essential nature of a god : divinity b. b capitalized god supreme being

2. 2 a god or goddess - the deities of ancient Greece

3. 3 one exalted or revered as supremely good or powerful

"I do not believe in a personal god and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."[57] In his book The World as I See It, he wrote: "A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty, which are only accessible to our reason in their most elementary forms—it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man."[58]The question of scientific determinism gave rise to questions about Einstein's position on theological determinism, and whether or not he believed in a God. In 1929, Einstein told Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein "I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a God Who concerns Himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."[54] In a 1950 letter to M. Berkowitz, Einstein stated that "My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment."[55] Einstein also stated: "I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth."

Main Entry: AGNOSTIC ag-!n@s-tik http://plus.aol.com/aol/dictionary?invocationType=topsearchbox.refcentre&query=agnostic
Pronunciation: \ ag-ˈnäs-tik, əg- \
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek agnōstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnōstos known, from gignōskein to know - More at - know
Date: 1869
Results
1. 1 a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable broadly one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

2. 2 a person unwilling to commit to an opinion about something - political agnostics

So based on the above definitions and Einsteins statements I would conclude that he was a Athiest and latter in life became more Agnostic. By his own statements and not your opinion that he believed in God.

(B) Another Earth exist and is support life in the form of dinosaurs
true or false
This is false. If you have evidence that another Earth exist with dinosaurs please post a link.

(C)Matter is composed of 100 percent empty space: true or false
The answer to this is false. Matter is composed of fermions

[fermions] =[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter]

(D) Energy has mass is false. *I already addressed this last post.

Agobot writes:

quote:
What is it dependent upon? Your common sense? How does your everyday logic and common sense explain positive and negative charges turning to consciousness? I have a feeling your answer to this will put the final touches of a very hilarious thread.
You think the universe is dependant upon God. I do not know the answer. So what. Positive negative charges turning to conciousness may be a emergent property of energy and have nothing to do with a diety. Who knows the answer? You?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by Agobot, posted 10-26-2008 5:03 AM Agobot has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by Agobot, posted 10-26-2008 12:38 PM 1.61803 has not yet responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10193
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 176 of 185 (486969)
10-26-2008 11:33 AM
Reply to: Message 158 by Agobot
10-24-2008 7:10 PM


Re: A sampling of their Answers
It's just that this thing has much much greater intelligence than us, it might be aliens, and aliens are natural right?

Regardless the obvious question then is what created it/them?

It is hard enough working out how the things we know to actually exist got here without vanishing down the rabbit hole of having to consider how things that may or may not exist may or may not have got there as well.

If you want to invoke gods, God, aliens or whatever to satisfy your need for answers then you are free to do so. Whatever makes you happy.

But let's not pretend that your conjecture regarding various improbabilities has any more basis than the idea that a universe like ours was inevitable.

Both are philosophical positions borne of humanity's complete ignorance of any of the relevant facts.

I hope science will one day answer these questions. But whacking in whatever answer seems subjectively most satisfying is not a good method of making reliable conclusions.

Better to just admit ignorance and continue the search. I am sure humanity will benefit from the journey regardless of the answers that may, or may not, be discovered.

Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by Agobot, posted 10-24-2008 7:10 PM Agobot has not yet responded

  
Agobot
Member (Idle past 2916 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 177 of 185 (486976)
10-26-2008 12:38 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by 1.61803
10-26-2008 10:23 AM


Re: Atheism
1.61... writes:

So based on the above definitions and Einsteins statements I would conclude that he was a Athiest and latter in life became more Agnostic. By his own statements and not your opinion that he believed in God.

Where in that statements did einstein say or imply he was an atheist??? That's an outright lie and the product of your imagination.

1.61... writes:

Energy has mass is false. *I already addressed this last post.

HAHA, talk about weightless 1.61803 :)

1.61... writes:

Matter is composed of 100 percent empty space: true or false
The answer to this is false. Matter is composed of fermions

Your ignorance is too great and this forum is not an educational institution... so I'll leave at that, live in your dreams. Bye


"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind" - A.Einstein

"I am a deeply religious nonbeliever - This is a somewhat new kind of religion" - Albert Einstein

"Matter is nothing but the harmonies created by this vibrating string..The laws of physics can be compared to the laws of harmony allowed on the string. The universe itself, composed of countless vibrating strings, would then be comparable to a symphony." - Michio Kaku


This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by 1.61803, posted 10-26-2008 10:23 AM 1.61803 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by Deftil, posted 10-27-2008 5:57 PM Agobot has responded

    
Deftil
Member (Idle past 1841 days)
Posts: 128
From: Virginia, USA
Joined: 04-19-2008


Message 178 of 185 (487108)
10-27-2008 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by Agobot
10-26-2008 12:38 PM


Re: Atheism
Agobot, your defensiveness and appeals to authority are comtemptible. If you were confident that your beliefs were accurate, I don't believe it would be likely that you would resort to such measures.

You've listed some people that have hinted that there may be some sort of god. Ok, so should I now list some intelligent people that don't believe in a god? Where will that get us? Would that even constitute an actual argument?

I also find it ironic that you criticize others atheism as being due in some part to not keeping up with modern physics while you cite Einstein as example of someone who was some sort of theist. If I wanted to act like you, I would simply say something like "that's ironic and if you don't know why, I don't have the time to teach you" but in an attempt to foster productive discussion I will actually tell you. It's because Einstein didn't even accept all the conclusions of the modern physics of his time. But let's not dwell on that because simply stating what you think someone else believes does not constitute an actual argument, and there's another thread on the forum somewhere about Einstein's religious beliefs and anyone who wants to dicuss that can do so there.

The god of the gaps isn't much of an argument for a god/creator/designer and as far as I can tell, that's what you're giving us. Because we can't explain everything, that means there is a god. No, logically, it doesn't. There may or may not be a god, but regardless, it doesn't necesarily logically follow from the fact that our scientific explanations are incomplete that there is one. Like I said earlier in this thread, answering questions with "god" only works if you shut your mind off immediately after giving that answer.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by Agobot, posted 10-26-2008 12:38 PM Agobot has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 179 by Agobot, posted 10-27-2008 6:12 PM Deftil has not yet responded
 Message 180 by Agobot, posted 10-27-2008 6:37 PM Deftil has responded

    
Agobot
Member (Idle past 2916 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 179 of 185 (487113)
10-27-2008 6:12 PM
Reply to: Message 178 by Deftil
10-27-2008 5:57 PM


Re: Atheism
Deftil writes:

The god of the gaps isn't much of an argument for a god/creator/designer and as far as I can tell, that's what you're giving us. Because we can't explain everything, that means there is a god. No, logically, it doesn't.

God of the gaps is a very silly notion if you are trying to attribute it to Einstein's beliefs, which happen to be mine as well. Your assertion implies that your knowledge of the universe, life and reality is more than 50% of all there is to know. Sorry to burst your bubble, but what you call science is still in diapers. You don't know even 1% of there is to know, to claim god of the gaps. Your knowledge and the knowledge of ANY scientist in the world is just a dot in the ocean of there is that we'll one day find out. If you want a reverse analogy, you can say that your No-God scenario is based on on the few dots of knowledge you've uncovered in a vast lake of knowledge that you are yet to uncover. And it's ridiculous if you're trying to base your no god beliefs on science, as if it was stating there is no god.

Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.


"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind" - A.Einstein

"I am a deeply religious nonbeliever - This is a somewhat new kind of religion" - Albert Einstein

"Matter is nothing but the harmonies created by this vibrating string..The laws of physics can be compared to the laws of harmony allowed on the string. The universe itself, composed of countless vibrating strings, would then be comparable to a symphony." - Michio Kaku


This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by Deftil, posted 10-27-2008 5:57 PM Deftil has not yet responded

    
Agobot
Member (Idle past 2916 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 180 of 185 (487119)
10-27-2008 6:37 PM
Reply to: Message 178 by Deftil
10-27-2008 5:57 PM


Re: Atheism
Deftil writes:

If I wanted to act like you, I would simply say something like "that's ironic and if you don't know why, I don't have the time to teach you" but in an attempt to foster productive discussion I will actually tell you. It's because Einstein didn't even accept all the conclusions of the modern physics of his time.

And do you know what these conclusions implied? I bet you don't. You have absolutely no idea of the implications of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle even by today's interpretations. This is just another one of your assertions that science of today has found the answers.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by Deftil, posted 10-27-2008 5:57 PM Deftil has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by Deftil, posted 10-27-2008 6:50 PM Agobot has responded

    
RewPrev1
...
891011
12
13Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017