Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-26-2019 1:42 AM
21 online now:
AZPaul3, PaulK, Tangle, Tanypteryx (4 members, 17 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: ooh-child
Post Volume:
Total: 854,790 Year: 9,826/19,786 Month: 2,248/2,119 Week: 284/724 Day: 9/114 Hour: 3/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
5678
9
10Next
Author Topic:   Hawking Comes Clean
slevesque
Member (Idle past 2813 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 121 of 148 (580370)
09-08-2010 9:19 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by onifre
09-08-2010 9:04 PM


Re: We just don't know... And that's okay.
Red Herring

We were talking about colliding branes. or first cause vs no cause


This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by onifre, posted 09-08-2010 9:04 PM onifre has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by onifre, posted 09-08-2010 9:33 PM slevesque has not yet responded

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 2813 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 122 of 148 (580371)
09-08-2010 9:21 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by nwr
09-08-2010 9:13 PM


Re: We just don't know... And that's okay.
Then your opinion has change since this:

There probably wasn't a first cause.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by nwr, posted 09-08-2010 9:13 PM nwr has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by nwr, posted 09-08-2010 9:41 PM slevesque has not yet responded

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 1123 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 123 of 148 (580372)
09-08-2010 9:33 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by slevesque
09-08-2010 9:19 PM


Re: We just don't know... And that's okay.
We were talking about colliding branes. or first cause vs no cause

Yeah I got that, but I don't think this negates my post. What is the "red herring" in reference to?

- Oni


This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by slevesque, posted 09-08-2010 9:19 PM slevesque has not yet responded

    
nwr
Member
Posts: 5585
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 124 of 148 (580374)
09-08-2010 9:41 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by slevesque
09-08-2010 9:21 PM


Re: We just don't know... And that's okay.
slevesque writes:
Then your opinion has change since this:

No. But I am wondering what you don't understand about "probably."
This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by slevesque, posted 09-08-2010 9:21 PM slevesque has not yet responded

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 1815 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 125 of 148 (580439)
09-09-2010 3:32 AM
Reply to: Message 112 by slevesque
09-08-2010 6:07 PM


Re: We just don't know... And that's okay.
And there goes colliding branes out the window I guess.

This isn't a "first cause". There are competing ideas for what happened at T=0. What is being shown is that in none of them is a "first cause" required, either at T=0, or at any point for T<0 if such a region exists.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by slevesque, posted 09-08-2010 6:07 PM slevesque has not yet responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10285
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


(1)
Message 126 of 148 (580444)
09-09-2010 4:58 AM
Reply to: Message 120 by 1.61803
09-08-2010 9:14 PM


Re: Metaphysical Claims
Numbers writes:

OHHHHHH knOOOOooowwWW! Straggler's next thread. " Has Metaphysical claims failed"

Well apparently any suggestion that things happen in the world without intervention from the supernatural is an unwarranted intrusion into metaphysics about which science can say nothing.

So excuse me while God and I take a visit to the toilet where we shall be enjoying our latest creation.

"Metaphysics is a restaurant where they give you a thirty thousand page menu, and no food." Robert M. Pirsig


This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by 1.61803, posted 09-08-2010 9:14 PM 1.61803 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by cavediver, posted 09-09-2010 5:14 AM Straggler has not yet responded
 Message 128 by shalamabobbi, posted 09-09-2010 11:13 AM Straggler has not yet responded
 Message 129 by Omnivorous, posted 09-09-2010 1:54 PM Straggler has not yet responded
 Message 136 by 1.61803, posted 09-09-2010 3:38 PM Straggler has responded

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 1815 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


(1)
Message 127 of 148 (580445)
09-09-2010 5:14 AM
Reply to: Message 126 by Straggler
09-09-2010 4:58 AM


Re: Metaphysical Claims
So excuse me while God and I take a visit to the toilet where we shall be enjoying our latest creation.

You owe me one monitor and one keyboard


This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Straggler, posted 09-09-2010 4:58 AM Straggler has not yet responded

  
shalamabobbi
Member (Idle past 1021 days)
Posts: 397
Joined: 01-10-2009


Message 128 of 148 (580488)
09-09-2010 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 126 by Straggler
09-09-2010 4:58 AM


If you decide to publish your thoughts I have the title..

Skid Marks on the Road to Damascus..


This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Straggler, posted 09-09-2010 4:58 AM Straggler has not yet responded

    
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 1140 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


Message 129 of 148 (580503)
09-09-2010 1:54 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by Straggler
09-09-2010 4:58 AM


Re: Metaphysical Claims
Straggler writes:

Well apparently any suggestion that things happen in the world without intervention from the supernatural is an unwarranted intrusion into metaphysics about which science can say nothing.

You'd be shocked at what God helped me do last night.

Edited by Omnivorous, : No reason given.


Have you ever been to an American wedding? Where's the vodka? Where's the marinated herring?!
-Gogol Bordello

Real things always push back.
-William James


This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Straggler, posted 09-09-2010 4:58 AM Straggler has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by Huntard, posted 09-09-2010 1:58 PM Omnivorous has responded

    
Huntard
Member (Idle past 467 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 130 of 148 (580505)
09-09-2010 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 129 by Omnivorous
09-09-2010 1:54 PM


Re: Metaphysical Claims
I don't know how you confused Straggler with me, but I'm sure he'll be glad to come across as a tough guy,rather than a cricket garb wearing wanker.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by Omnivorous, posted 09-09-2010 1:54 PM Omnivorous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by cavediver, posted 09-09-2010 2:12 PM Huntard has responded
 Message 132 by Omnivorous, posted 09-09-2010 2:17 PM Huntard has not yet responded

    
cavediver
Member (Idle past 1815 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 131 of 148 (580507)
09-09-2010 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by Huntard
09-09-2010 1:58 PM


Re: Metaphysical Claims
I don't know how you confused Straggler with me, but I'm sure he'll be glad to come across as a tough guy

Oh yes, we know all about the dutch tough guys...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by Huntard, posted 09-09-2010 1:58 PM Huntard has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by Huntard, posted 09-09-2010 2:21 PM cavediver has not yet responded

  
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 1140 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


Message 132 of 148 (580509)
09-09-2010 2:17 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by Huntard
09-09-2010 1:58 PM


Re: Metaphysical Claims
Huntard writes:

don't know how you confused Straggler with me

I can't help it, I'm old.

Or maybe I should insist that God did it.

but I'm sure he'll be glad to come across as a tough guy,rather than a cricket garb wearing wanker.

Your reply was worth the error.

I watched a cricket match in Inverness two summers ago: even more boring than baseball, but the clothes were about equally odd.


Have you ever been to an American wedding? Where's the vodka? Where's the marinated herring?!
-Gogol Bordello

Real things always push back.
-William James


This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by Huntard, posted 09-09-2010 1:58 PM Huntard has not yet responded

    
Huntard
Member (Idle past 467 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 133 of 148 (580511)
09-09-2010 2:21 PM
Reply to: Message 131 by cavediver
09-09-2010 2:12 PM


Re: Metaphysical Claims

Quite an accurate portrayal! Bloody northerners.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by cavediver, posted 09-09-2010 2:12 PM cavediver has not yet responded

    
Dr Jack
Member (Idle past 277 days)
Posts: 3507
From: Leicester, England
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 134 of 148 (580516)
09-09-2010 3:00 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by kbertsche
09-07-2010 9:27 PM


Re: Laws of physics: Two perspectives
But that's not what I claimed. I claimed that the laws of physics are metaphysically simpler in a biblical perspective than in an atheistic perspective.

That's rather cheating, don't you think? Aren't you essentially arguing that if we ignore this massive, complex, unproven thing that what's less is simpler? Isn't that rather like claiming that less people die of breast cancer than testicular cancer if you ignore all those women?

Consider an automobile. Why postulate a human designer and builder, which is much more complex than the automobile itself? Isn't it simpler to postulate that the automobile was self-caused?

Well, gosh, might it be because we know about automobiles and know about how they are made, and can go look at the factories and talk to the designers?

The biblical, theistic picture of the universe is not simply the atheistic picture with God added to the picture.

No, it isn't, it something massively less plausible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by kbertsche, posted 09-07-2010 9:27 PM kbertsche has acknowledged this reply

  
jar
Member
Posts: 30996
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.2


Message 135 of 148 (580518)
09-09-2010 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by kbertsche
09-07-2010 9:27 PM


Automobile and design
kbertsche writes:

Consider an automobile. Why postulate a human designer and builder, which is much more complex than the automobile itself? Isn't it simpler to postulate that the automobile was self-caused?

Yes let's consider the automobile.

Let's see, I find a plate that says Body by Fisher or Ghia or Bertone or Ital Design. I find patent numbers and part numbers and made by stamped on part after part. I find Ford and Chevy and Jaguar and Alfa Romeo and Fiat and Peugeot and Rover and I can bring the designers in, interview them and test them.

I can look at the parts, say and engine and tell whether it was cast or machined, original or aftermarket, whether it has been modified.

We can look at the product "automobile" tell that not only is it designed but different parts were designed by different people and that similar parts found in other automobiles were designed by yet other folk.

In addition, as I pointed out way back in 2006 here:

quote:
There is also the fact that the designer is too stupid to adopt good ideas.

Consider cars. There are many species or kinds of cars, Packard, Ford, Chevy, Mercedes, Humber, DKW, AutoUnion, Alfa Romeo, Citroen just as there are many kinds of mammals, lions, tigers, bears, man, orangutan, elephant, horse and of course, ohmys.

The difference between something designed, like cars, and those things that are not designed like mammals though can be seen in the difference in how good ideas do not propagate through out the living species or kinds.

In the early 1920s power windshield wipers appeared on the first car. Within only a few years they were found on every car.

In 1923 the first standard equipment radio appeared. Within only a few years they were found on every car.

In 1939, Buick introduced turn signals. Within only a few years they were found on every car.

The list is almost endless.


  • electric wipers instead of vacuum.
  • internal combustion engines.
  • radial tires.
  • heaters.
  • air conditioning.
  • roll down windows.
  • headlights.
  • mirrors.
  • steering wheels.
  • tops.
  • spare tires.
  • space saver spares.
  • starters.
  • the change from generator to alternator.

I could go on but that list should give you an idea.

In each instance this was a new feature that first appeared in only one make, sometimes only one model of a car. The designer though took good ideas from one model and applied those same ideas to EVERY model.

We do not see that when we look at examples of living critters. The humans brain is not then repeated in all mammals, the eagles eyes are not then repeated in all animals, good features, advances do not get incorporated across all the makes and models, species or kind, of mammals.

Looking at living critters what we find is NOT Intelligent Design.


What we see in living things and in designed artifacts like automobiles is simply not the same.

If when we looked at living things we found the same things we find in designed stuff like automobiles then it might be worth considering if living things were designed.

But so far no evidence has come forward supporting living things being designed.

Edited by jar, : change sub-title.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by kbertsche, posted 09-07-2010 9:27 PM kbertsche has acknowledged this reply

  
Prev1
...
5678
9
10Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019