Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 60 (9208 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: Skylink
Post Volume: Total: 919,412 Year: 6,669/9,624 Month: 9/238 Week: 9/22 Day: 0/9 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The one and only non-creationist in this forum.
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 4215 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


(1)
Message 1 of 558 (677871)
11-02-2012 8:16 AM


I propose in this thread that I am the one and only non-creationist in this forum. That is simple. I cannot conceive a single atom to be created out of nothing or being turned into nothing. An atom that exists could only be relatively absent in a relative location or it may change its form, split or fuse with other atoms if it is present there. Creation is absolutely impossible in any way, shape or form. Nothing is new but all is only newly reconfigured in ways that are rather old is the only rational position possible in my view.
The others on this site I divide into two groups. The majority of cryptic creationists who are firmly in denial. And the minority of open creationists ridiculed and bullied by the majority of those firmly in denial about their creationism.
I might have overlooked someone who is also an open non-creationist here, and if such is the case, then the cat owes them an apology. They are welcome to come out.
Open creationists get some respect from the feline for being open. Also being in minority gets some sympathy by default. Besides since bigbangism is a far greater violation of reason than open creationism,- after all, open creationists propose an object they call God, however inconceivable, while bigbangists do not suggest anything but pure nothing as the ultimate source of not just one but all the atoms in existence, the open creationists have some advantage on logical grounds. While the cryptic ones deserve ridicule only for being in such an absurd denial.
Denial is impossible and here is the testimony from the horse's mouth:
Mr. Hawking is the idiot idol of the cryptic lot and this is his position in his own words all here are invited to justify or deny: "Since there is such a law as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself out of nothing."
Enough said.
Since that is free for all now, anybody is free to demonstrate they are not creationists cryptic or otherwise or defend their creationism before the Cheshire who will analyse and evaluate all the claims staked to such a position.
Thank you.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Dogmafood, posted 11-02-2012 10:08 AM Alfred Maddenstein has replied
 Message 4 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-02-2012 10:09 AM Alfred Maddenstein has not replied
 Message 5 by Omnivorous, posted 11-02-2012 10:50 AM Alfred Maddenstein has not replied
 Message 9 by Taq, posted 11-02-2012 11:24 AM Alfred Maddenstein has replied
 Message 10 by ringo, posted 11-02-2012 2:17 PM Alfred Maddenstein has replied
 Message 14 by bluegenes, posted 11-02-2012 8:29 PM Alfred Maddenstein has replied
 Message 15 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-03-2012 7:22 PM Alfred Maddenstein has replied
 Message 103 by ICANT, posted 11-09-2012 10:29 PM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 13106
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002


Message 2 of 558 (677873)
11-02-2012 8:43 AM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the The one and only non-creationist in this forum. thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
Dogmafood
Member
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


(3)
Message 3 of 558 (677876)
11-02-2012 10:08 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Alfred Maddenstein
11-02-2012 8:16 AM


If you're interested, he went that way.
If anyone here is cryptic then you must be at the top of the list.
If I were to respond to you in kind then I would say something like, 'The Cheshire cat plays the muse well in wonderland but does not have enough substance to make it past the door and back to reality. Imagined to exist, the little pussy is forever disappearing.'
Equating the knowledge held by a theoretical physicist with the 'knowledge held' by a religious creationist is absurd. Hawking's conclusions are not at all like the Pope's.
Separating your position from the rest of the forum is appropriate but I think that you have the labels wrong.
While some of your questions and points seem valid to me, there is no conspiracy and you are not a cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-02-2012 8:16 AM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-04-2012 1:53 AM Dogmafood has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 558 (677877)
11-02-2012 10:09 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Alfred Maddenstein
11-02-2012 8:16 AM


while bigbangists do not suggest anything but pure nothing as the ultimate source of not just one but all the atoms in existence,
What do you suggest is the ultimate source of the atoms?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-02-2012 8:16 AM Alfred Maddenstein has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 123 days)
Posts: 4001
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


(1)
Message 5 of 558 (677882)
11-02-2012 10:50 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Alfred Maddenstein
11-02-2012 8:16 AM


AM writes:
I cannot conceive a single atom to be created out of nothing or being turned into nothing.
...
Mr. Hawking is the idiot idol of the cryptic lot...
All your posts here boil down to insults based on arguments from incredulity.
In contrast, Hawking can show us his work.
Please show us yours.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-02-2012 8:16 AM Alfred Maddenstein has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-02-2012 10:58 AM Omnivorous has replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4597
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 10.0


(7)
Message 6 of 558 (677884)
11-02-2012 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Omnivorous
11-02-2012 10:50 AM


Oh Great! Now he's going to be leaving dead mice on the doorstep.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Omnivorous, posted 11-02-2012 10:50 AM Omnivorous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Omnivorous, posted 11-02-2012 11:07 AM Tanypteryx has not replied
 Message 8 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-02-2012 11:09 AM Tanypteryx has not replied
 Message 16 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-04-2012 12:31 AM Tanypteryx has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 123 days)
Posts: 4001
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


Message 7 of 558 (677888)
11-02-2012 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Tanypteryx
11-02-2012 10:58 AM


Tanypteryx writes:
Oh Great! Now he's going to be leaving dead mice on the doorstep.
Improvement.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-02-2012 10:58 AM Tanypteryx has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 558 (677890)
11-02-2012 11:09 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Tanypteryx
11-02-2012 10:58 AM


All your posts here boil down to insults based on arguments from incredulity.
In contrast, Hawking can show us his work.
Please show us yours.
Oh Great! Now he's going to be leaving dead mice on the doorstep.
Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-02-2012 10:58 AM Tanypteryx has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10293
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 7.4


(1)
Message 9 of 558 (677893)
11-02-2012 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Alfred Maddenstein
11-02-2012 8:16 AM


I propose in this thread that I am the one and only non-creationist in this forum. That is simple. I cannot conceive a single atom to be created out of nothing or being turned into nothing.
I am with you on that one. I fully agree that the Big Bang was caused by something, be it the collision of M-branes or some other theory yet to be constructed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-02-2012 8:16 AM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-04-2012 2:08 AM Taq has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 660 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 10 of 558 (677909)
11-02-2012 2:17 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Alfred Maddenstein
11-02-2012 8:16 AM


Alfred Maddenstein writes:
I cannot conceive a single atom to be created out of nothing or being turned into nothing.
So "non-creationist" means you have a particular conceptual deficiency? Like "colourblind" means you have a particular vision deficiency?
Okay, you might very well be the only one here with that specific deficiency.
Edited by ringo, : Fixed garbled logic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-02-2012 8:16 AM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-04-2012 12:56 AM ringo has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9580
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 7.0


(1)
Message 11 of 558 (677920)
11-02-2012 4:04 PM


You're missing out a whole category of cat. The Manx.
Those of us that know that there is no tale.
(Yes I know)

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Coyote, posted 11-02-2012 4:19 PM Tangle has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2354 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(2)
Message 12 of 558 (677921)
11-02-2012 4:19 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Tangle
11-02-2012 4:04 PM


You're missing out a whole category of cat. The Manx.
Those of us that know that there is no tale.
(Yes I know)
Imagine the quandry a pet store owner was in when one of his kittens suffered an unfortunate accident, and lost its tail.
What could he do?
He couldn't wholesale the poor creature, nor could he retail it!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Tangle, posted 11-02-2012 4:04 PM Tangle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Panda, posted 11-02-2012 6:57 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3961 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 13 of 558 (677930)
11-02-2012 6:57 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Coyote
11-02-2012 4:19 PM


Groan
You both deserve to be pun-ished.

"There is no great invention, from fire to flying, which has not been hailed as an insult to some god." J. B. S. Haldane

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Coyote, posted 11-02-2012 4:19 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2725 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 14 of 558 (677934)
11-02-2012 8:29 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Alfred Maddenstein
11-02-2012 8:16 AM


Alfred Maddenstein writes:
Besides since bigbangism is a far greater violation of reason than open creationism,- after all, open creationists propose an object they call God, however inconceivable, while bigbangists do not suggest anything but pure nothing as the ultimate source of not just one but all the atoms in existence,.....
"Pure nothing" cannot be a source, as a source is something. The Big Bang is the rapid expansion of something not yet understood into something else.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-02-2012 8:16 AM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-04-2012 1:23 AM bluegenes has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(2)
Message 15 of 558 (677990)
11-03-2012 7:22 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Alfred Maddenstein
11-02-2012 8:16 AM


Since that is free for all now, anybody is free to demonstrate they are not creationists ...
Sure thing.
creationism noun : a doctrine or theory holding that matter, the various forms of life, and the world were created by God out of nothing and usually in the way described in Genesis
I do not hold this view. So I am not a creationist.
The fact that I disagree with you does not make me a creationist, because that isn't what "creationist" means. And it is unnecessary to try to hijack it for this purpose, since there is already a word for people who disagree with you.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-02-2012 8:16 AM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-04-2012 11:46 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024