Science and Religion questions (1 Viewer)

[magnifier661]

I like Denny's link he provided....

Our universe is thought to have begun as an infinitesimally small (of volume as small as it seems), infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something - a singularity. Where did it come from? We don't know. Why did it appear? We don't know.

After its initial appearance, it apparently inflated (the "Big Bang"), expanded and cooled, going from very, very small and very, very hot, to the size and temperature of our current universe. It continues to expand and cool to this day and we are inside of it: incredible creatures living on a unique planet, circling a beautiful star clustered together with several hundred billion other stars in a galaxy soaring through the cosmos, all of which is inside of an expanding universe that began as an infinitesimal singularity which appeared out of nowhere for reasons unknown. This is the Big Bang theory.

I didn't realize that the same writers of the "Big Bang" were as poetic as the Biblical writers! Such faith, such romance, such love!

I can imagine the day Denny debates them after salvation.... I can see it now.

Denny: GOD exists!

Atheist: There is no evidence that proves God exists!

Denny: There is no evidence that the singularity exists!

 

[chevyrunssometimes]

When the laws of physics do not apply, the concepts that we're familiar with break down and we'd have a tough time visualizing things. Without space, you can't have much spatial recognition, can you?

etc.

Yeah, I must admit I don't know what you are trying to say now.

Here is my context: Three people discussing a theoretical event. What that event is, it's conditions, etc., do not bear causally on our current conditions -- the ones maintaining right now as we share our thoughts.

That there wasn't space, that our physical laws were not applicable has nothing to do with what we are currently doing (using concepts, enjoying the laws of physics and chemistry, etc.).

The idea I was attempting to convey is that right here and now, our concepts (which I assert are animal concepts determined by the very nature of our physical bodies interacting in a physical environment), may still be limiting our ability to do justice to such extreme and problematic endeavors as the beginning of the universe or the ultimate nature of space time. In other words, there's no guarantee they'll match (and actually, very little reason to think they even should).

So speaking of a lack of spacial recognition at the time of the event itself leaves me with, WTF are you even talking about.

No one, as far as I know, believes we actually transport ourselves to that moment and thus are subject to the conditions at that moment .. simply in order to discuss it.

 

[magnifier661]

Yeah, I must admit I don't know what you are trying to say now.

Here is my context: Three people discussing a theoretical event. What that event is, it's conditions, etc., do not bear causally on our current conditions -- the ones maintaining right now as we share our thoughts.

That there wasn't space, that our physical laws were not applicable has nothing to do with what we are currently doing (using concepts, enjoying the laws of physics and chemistry, etc.).

The idea I was attempting to convey is that right here and now, our concepts (which I assert are animal concepts determined by the very nature of our physical bodies interacting in a physical environment, may still be limiting our ability to do justice to such extreme and problematic endeavors.

So speaking of a lack of spacial awareness at the time of the event itself leaves me with, WTF are you even talking about.

No one, as far as I know, believes we actually transport ourselves to that moment and thus are subject to the conditions at that moment .. simply in order to discuss it.

Genesis/Beginning is arguably the most talked about and studied science and theology on this planet. Just because you don't get it; doesn't mean it's not worth debating.

 

[blazerboy30]

Did you mean "even without time?"

If so, support that claim

No. With the concept of time, there is no such thing as simultaneity.

 

[blazerboy30]

I think you missed this part, sport: "You're free to go now."

My questions were very pertinent to your comment. That you can't see that becomes more apparent with each successive post. Again, more bad faith (you're either retarded or are playing dumb) neither speaks well for your position.

Hey there, junior. You might want to figure out how to use that complicated "quote" feature on these boards before attempting to call somebody retarded.

But I like you. You're comical. You're to religious discussions as jlprk is to basketball discussions. Completely irrelevant, nonsensical, and an insignificant shtick.

 

[chevyrunssometimes]

Genesis/Beginning is arguably the most talked about and studied science and theology on this planet.

Don't make me laugh. Arguably? Why pretend? Argue it. I'd love to see you prove (to use your term) that these two topics are the most talked about matters in either science or theology. In fact I don't think you can come close. But I am open to proof and persuasion. That is what you ask of the assertions of others is it not?

Just because you don't get it; doesn't mean it's not worth debating.

This would hold for anyone. Ignorance on a subject does not determine its value as a topic. Thus it should probably have been presented as a general statement.

There's nothing I don't get about the conversation so far except where I have asked for clarification. And I have not asked for any clarification about the "beginnings." Rather I asked Denny about his misplaced concreteness --that is pretending that the circumstances present at the big bang maintain today during those times when we merely discuss the matter.

Read the citation again. Maybe you just skimmed it.

 

[chevyrunssometimes]

Hey there, junior.

Oh look, the boy's employed a diminutive term. Golly, I sure feel put in my place.

You might want to figure out how to use that complicated "quote" feature on these boards before attempting to call somebody retarded.

What a retarded thing for you to say.

I'm managing the quotes, thanks, but you've not managed to reply to either of the two questions put to you. Too bad there's not a button for understanding, eh?

You like me? Well, I never claimed you lacked good taste.

 

[chevyrunssometimes]

I'm not reading anything into what he wrote, just parsing it as he wrote it.

Wise decision. Mags is mistaken, just as he was in believing he knew that the B&W characterization was a result of his religious convictions. But what can you say to him? He just knows what he knows.

 

[ABM]

Wise decision. Mags is mistaken, just as he was in believing he knew that the B&W characterization was a result of his religious convictions. But what can you say to him? He just knows what he knows.

Yeah, so? And your chevy only runs sometimes.

 

[jlprk]

Matter cannot be created from nothing; like I've pointed out in many other threads. This also applies with "Multi-verse" theories.

You keep posting this rule you made up. So I get to use my godlike powers too. I posit that matter can be created from nothing every...(hmm, age of universe is 13B years...) 20 billion years. Next problem?

If you ever experienced a medical miracle, would it change your religious position? For instance, if you struggled with chronic back pain for ten years, and it stopped the day after someone prayed over you. I had that happen 7 years ago, and have not had one re-occurrence of my pain.

There might be a psychic force, or a dimension through which such communication travels. That requires some undiscovered science, but not the authority of a God, or religion.

 

[ABM]

This was rather interesting....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God

 

[ABM]

http://www.gotquestions.org/argument-existence-God.html

Philosopher J. S. Mill (not a Christian) summed up where we have now come to: “It is self-evident that only Mind can create mind.” The only rational and reasonable conclusion is that an eternal Creator is the one who is responsible for reality as we know it. Or to put it in a logical set of statements:

• Something exists.
• You do not get something from nothing.
• Therefore a necessary and eternal “something” exists.
• The only two options are an eternal universe and an eternal Creator.
• Science and philosophy have disproven the concept of an eternal universe.
• Therefore, an eternal Creator exists.

Former atheist Lee Strobel, who arrived at this end result many years ago, has commented, “Essentially, I realized that to stay an atheist, I would have to believe that nothing produces everything; non-life produces life; randomness produces fine-tuning; chaos produces information; unconsciousness produces consciousness; and non-reason produces reason. Those leaps of faith were simply too big for me to take, especially in light of the affirmative case for God's existence … In other words, in my assessment the Christian worldview accounted for the totality of the evidence much better than the atheistic worldview.”.........

 

[ABM]

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm

 

[crowTrobot]

• Science and philosophy have disproven the concept of an eternal universe.

utterly false

 

[ABM]

utterly false

The thing is....as it relates to God, eternity, and all that....you don't know for "sure", I don't know for "sure". I don't know about you, but I feel very good about the path I'm on. If you feel the same about you're own path, then cheers to ya, brah.

 

[crowTrobot]

“It is self-evident that only Mind can create mind.”

pre-darwinian revolution quote which is a good example of human intuition being useless without observation

 

[crowTrobot]

The thing is....you don't know for "sure", I don't know for "sure". I don't know about you, but I feel very good about the path I'm on. If you feel the same about you're own path, then cheers to ya, brah. :cheers"

i know for sure that the concept of an eternal universe has not been disproven. false premise.

 

[ABM]

i know for sure that the concept of an eternal universe has not been disproven. false premise.

Awesome.

 

[blazerboy30]

Oh look, the boy's employed a diminutive term. Golly, I sure feel put in my place.

You weren't put in your place. You proudly displayed your nonsense for all to see. I merely commented on it.

What a retarded thing for you to say.

I'm managing the quotes, thanks,

Well, now you are. It took a few tries but you're figuring out these complicated interwebz.

but you've not managed to reply to either of the two questions put to you. Too bad there's not a button for understanding, eh?

Not responding to your strawman questioning has nothing to do with understanding. It is purely due to the fact that you're out in the weeds with maris and jlprk. It's more of a train wreck that people cringe when they see.

You like me? Well, I never claimed you lacked good taste.

I misspoke. I don't actually know you. I like the idea of you. This world needs caricatures like you who we don't take seriously.

 

[magnifier661]

You keep posting this rule you made up. So I get to use my godlike powers too. I posit that matter can be created from nothing every...(hmm, age of universe is 13B years...) 20 billion years. Next problem?



There might be a psychic force, or a dimension through which such communication travels. That requires some undiscovered science, but not the authority of a God, or religion.

Um that isn't a rule I made up. Lol!!!!

 

[Denny Crane]

You know you're hurting when jlprk mops up the forum with your argument.

 

[magnifier661]

You know when Denny is butt hurt; when he teams up with other posters.

The entire "energy and matter" being created from nothing is as empirical as the Easter bunny!

 

[Denny Crane]

You know when Denny is butt hurt; when he teams up with other posters.

The entire "energy and matter" being created from nothing is as empirical as the Easter bunny!

There's plenty if empirical evidence matter was created from "nothing."

jlprk may not actually know much, but you stumbled onto his one area of expertise.

 

[magnifier661]

There's plenty if empirical evidence matter was created from "nothing."

jlprk may not actually know much, but you stumbled onto his one area of expertise.

Really you have empirical evidence? I would love to see it!

Looks like you are talking out if your ass again

 

[magnifier661]

Lmao that's what I thought Denny. Stop your bullshit cause no one is buying!

 

[ABM]

Lmao that's what I thought Denny. Stop your bullshit cause no one is buying!

I'm about ready to send my boys down there. Iron sharpening iron, and all.

Proverbs 27:17

 

[Denny Crane]

Really you have empirical evidence? I would love to see it!

Looks like you are talking out if your ass again

Start with everything moving away from everything else. If you interpolate where these things were yesterday, they were slightly closer together. Interpolate their positions to last year and even closer together. Keep interpolating back in time and you get the singularity.

If you have something that has no size, you have "nothing."

There is matter. We can see it. It came from the singularity - there's no other explanation for it, period.

 

[ABM]

Start with everything moving away from everything else. If you interpolate where these things were yesterday, they were slightly closer together. Interpolate their positions to last year and even closer together. Keep interpolating back in time and you get the singularity.

If you have something that has no size, you have "nothing."

There is matter. We can see it. It came from the singularity - there's no other explanation for it, period.

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm

 

[magnifier661]

Start with everything moving away from everything else. If you interpolate where these things were yesterday, they were slightly closer together. Interpolate their positions to last year and even closer together. Keep interpolating back in time and you get the singularity.

If you have something that has no size, you have "nothing."

There is matter. We can see it. It came from the singularity - there's no other explanation for it, period.

Lmao!!!!! Yeah very bad attempt. Try again.

All of that is theoretical. I wanna see the this singularity.

 

[TripTango]

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm

That's a cute site. Here's another helpful link they have there:

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/WhyAtheism.htm