Register | Sign In

Understanding through Discussion

EvC Forum active members: 50 (9179 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,208 Year: 5,465/9,624 Month: 490/323 Week: 130/204 Day: 4/26 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   We know there's a God because...
black wolf
Junior Member (Idle past 5985 days)
Posts: 10
From: Berlin, Germany
Joined: 09-02-2005

Message 50 of 256 (458465)
02-29-2008 4:57 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by CTD
02-28-2008 10:18 PM

Re: DIY god
Teenagers, and children in general do lots of things that should get them hurt or killed. The number who are actually harmed is very small - I'd call it under 10% of what it should be if the world were purely natural.
I have trouble imagining what you base this assertion on. Less than 10% of the expected number of teens and children get hurt when touching live cables? Can you define an accident that should get one killed? Usually to detect satistical aberrations like the ones you assert, you need a comparison or an overall statistic.
CensusScope -- Population Pyramid and Age Distribution Statistics
we get the result that 21,42% of US citizens in the year 2000 were 14 years old or younger, and 20,51% of drowning victims were in that age group. There is a high probability that people in that age group are being watched when near water. We know that people of that age group also have a tendency for reckless or thoughtless behavior.
Looking at ages 0-4 years only, we find that they make up 6.82% of the population, but 11.5% of drowning victims.
If anything at all, we can conclude that God likes to watch toddlers less than teens.
According to your estimate of 10%, 'the world if it were purely natural' should also contain more than double the number of children that it actually has.
Ergo, the world you perceive subjectively does not correspond to the objective world.
Edited by black wolf, : quote syntax
Edited by black wolf, : added summary
Edited by black wolf, : correction

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by CTD, posted 02-28-2008 10:18 PM CTD 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