Author Topic: The Probability of the Big Bang  (Read 32974 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Aaron123

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2770
  • Darwins +77/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #377 on: March 23, 2012, 01:03:00 PM »
Gosh, I don't think anything would be good enough for you to believe in a God.  If God Himself walked into your room at night and talked to you in plain English, you'd attibute it to something else other than God.  So what could be done to prove demon possession to you?  Absolutely nothing?  You'd NEVER believe it? 

Once again, we have a christian lying and making a strawman.  I thought the bible said something against lying.

I can think of plenty of things that would change our minds and get us thinking that god exists.  The problem is; the "evidence" you're presenting are either terrible or can be easily explained by some other means.

Instead of anecdotal claims, why not unambiguous and repeatable claims.  Things like:

-A talking bible.  By this, I mean that a bible can levitate and talk of its own accord.  The bible should also be willing to let us examine it to make sure no trickery is involved.
-Pray for an amputee, and the amputee's limbs regenerates.
-Pray to fly, then sprout wings.  Or pray to fly like Superman does, and then you're able to do so.
-Pray that an elephant sprout wings, and then it does so



Quote
If I asked God, "God make the brakes on my car stop sqeaking, and then they did immediately, would that be a coincidence?  How many coincidences does it take to make a certainty? 


Now that's a shitty excuse for an answered prayer.  There's at least a dozen possible reason why your brakes could be sqeaking and then stops.  None of them requires your god's involvment.


Quote
God works differently than He did in the Old Testament.  After Christ's death on the cross and resurrection, He uses the Holy Spirit to communicate with us.  We no longer have God speaking to us from the sky, like he used to.  But we have many proofs of His existence if you would simply open your eyes and mind to the possibility.

This is really just another way of saying that the world operates exactly as though no gods exists.  Instead of god very plainly presenting himself to us, you have to make excuses for why he does nothing.  It explains why so-called miracles are trivial and anecdotal.  Before, god would do all sorts of impressive stuff.  Now, he's reduced to fixing your sqeaking brakes.

I know the econamy been rough lately, but daaaaaaaaaaaaaaamn...  :blank:
Being a Christian, I've made my decision. That decision offers no compromise; therefore, I'm closed to anything else.

Offline JeffPT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2093
  • Darwins +236/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a lead farmer mutha fucka
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #378 on: March 23, 2012, 01:05:38 PM »
Psychological?  You are sure of this?  Have you proven this?

There is ample evidence of this.  Yes.  Considering you can take certain drugs that make you experience similar things.  Considering you can eat certain fungus's and get similar experiences. 

There is no evidence of demons except for people claiming it because they don't know any better. 

Someone above mentioned that there must or may be an alternate universe that we don't understand or know about yet. 

Must or may?  Nice try.  There may be an alternate universe, but must?  No. Not must. 

That's believable to you? 

It's possible, but so are a zillion other things. 

But not supernatural, demonic possession?

Ridiculous. 

You can't say in one sentence, "Oh, there must be an alternate universe to help explain how the universe was created prior to 14 billion years ago, we'll figure it out someday, but we don't know how it's possible at the moment"....and in another sentence, say, "Demonic possession!  You're a fool!  That's ridiculous to believe in that because it's not provable!". 

Ok then, I won't.  I'll just say the second part. 

Seems like anything is possible. 

If you'd like to get technical, then I will say this.  The theory of demonic possession as a causative factor for some of the mental disturbances we see in humanity is equally as possible as little tiny aliens probing our brains with jars of peanut butter.   

If science can help explain how a little girl of 95 lbs. threw a football player up against the wall with one arm and was "cured" through prayer and Jesus' name, after her parents sold her soul to Satan when she was a child, then go right ahead and prove it.  Good luck...

LOL!  Sold her soul to Satan!  Good one! 

I told you how a 95 lb girl could use one arm to 'throw' a football player into the wall.  A small push to someone who is in an off balance position is all it takes to floor them.  Trust me, I've done it and seen it done.  It's not hard. 

And correlation does not imply causation rockv.  You say she was 'cured' in Jesus name, but how do you know that?  What else were they doing?  Did she simply calm down because she was tired?  Did Jesus come down and lay a hand on her or something?  Do you know that people in other cultures who practice exorcisms in other religions are 'cured' without a single mention of Jesus?  Wouldn't that lead you to believe that it was just a psychological phenomena inherent to the human species?  No, no.  You go ahead and ignore that one.  It MUST be Jesus.  LOL!  Ridiculous. 

And I sold my soul to Satan a few years back too.  Didn't get shit for it because Satan isn't real either. 

I don't have to prove anything rockv.  I'm not the one saying the only possible answer is demonic possession.  All I have to do is come up with a plausible alternate (natural) scenario and the lack of evidence you bring to the table is your undoing. 
Whenever events that are purported to occur in our best interest are as numerous as the events that will just as soon kill us, then intent is hard, if not impossible to assert. NDT

Offline jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5058
  • Darwins +578/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #379 on: March 23, 2012, 02:57:51 PM »
The two pieces of evidence which are the most telling are the expansion of the universe (evident by the distinct redshift that all stellar objects excepting our closest neighbor galaxies have, and the further away, the more redshifted), and the cosmic microwave background radiation (the "leftovers" of the Big Bang), which is literally present everywhere.
God and science can co-exist.  God created science.  Just because it appears that things are expanding means nothing.  It's science working.  God created the laws of science, they must work for things to operate.  But to use that as proof that God doesn't exist, is not a good argument.
I'm guessing you didn't even really understand what I was talking about, since I was responding to a question by kymer[1] about evidence for the Big Bang happening.  I didn't even mention God, let alone claim that that evidence "proved" anything.  So this is a strawman.

But as long as you raised that point, what's your evidence that God created science, and that God created the laws of science?  It's true that neither the expansion of the universe nor the CMBR "disprove God" (not that they were brought up because of God in the first place).  Your lack of any evidence that can't be attributed solely to the collective imagination of human beings is much more telling, so I'm giving you the opportunity to provide some real evidence that can be tested and verified.
 1. who has since stated that he was trolling here

Offline Tero

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 726
  • Darwins +18/-5
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #380 on: March 23, 2012, 04:41:11 PM »
I'm going to claim that the laws are the same, God or not. Even if god put together atoms, they are the same as if big bang did it.

Prove me wrong. I do not buy fine tuning. There are entire books about it.

Offline rockv12

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Darwins +3/-44
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #381 on: March 23, 2012, 04:47:13 PM »
The two pieces of evidence which are the most telling are the expansion of the universe (evident by the distinct redshift that all stellar objects excepting our closest neighbor galaxies have, and the further away, the more redshifted), and the cosmic microwave background radiation (the "leftovers" of the Big Bang), which is literally present everywhere.
God and science can co-exist.  God created science.  Just because it appears that things are expanding means nothing.  It's science working.  God created the laws of science, they must work for things to operate.  But to use that as proof that God doesn't exist, is not a good argument.
I'm guessing you didn't even really understand what I was talking about, since I was responding to a question by kymer[1] about evidence for the Big Bang happening.  I didn't even mention God, let alone claim that that evidence "proved" anything.  So this is a strawman.

But as long as you raised that point, what's your evidence that God created science, and that God created the laws of science?  It's true that neither the expansion of the universe nor the CMBR "disprove God" (not that they were brought up because of God in the first place).  Your lack of any evidence that can't be attributed solely to the collective imagination of human beings is much more telling, so I'm giving you the opportunity to provide some real evidence that can be tested and verified.
 1. who has since stated that he was trolling here

Evidence that God created science?  Biblical accuracy and historical accuracy prove the Bible's infallibility.  But since you asked, and it's the evolution thread here, isn't it obvious?  Such order and complexity and perfection in life and our physical world should make one go, "Hmmm?"  Design needs a designer.  I don't know what world that this fact doesn't apply...

Offline Alzael

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3577
  • Darwins +112/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #382 on: March 23, 2012, 04:50:49 PM »
Evidence that God created science?  Biblical accuracy and historical accuracy prove the Bible's infallibility.

Circular argument.

  But since you asked, and it's the evolution thread here, isn't it obvious?  Such order and complexity and perfection in life and our physical world should make one go, "Hmmm?"  Design needs a designer.  I don't know what world that this fact doesn't apply...
 

Argument from Ignorance.

No evidence for anything, just statements that prove nothing more than an inability to think logically or critically.
"I drank what?!"- Socrates

"Dying for something when you know you'll be resurrected is not a sacrifice.It's a parlour trick."- an aquaintance

Philip of Macedon: (via messenger) If we enter Sparta, we will raze all your buildings and ravage all your women.
Spartan Reply: If.

Offline Asmoday

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1309
  • Darwins +14/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #383 on: March 23, 2012, 06:23:37 PM »
Evidence that God created science?  Biblical accuracy and historical accuracy prove the Bible's infallibility.
Ah, you mean biblical accuracy like bats being birds, insects having four legs and young goats having the coloration of the wooden poles the parent goats mate in front of?

How about historical accuracy? Like the fact that there never was a global flood? Like the fact that there never was an exodus of Israelites from Egypt? Like the fact that the kingdom of David (as described in the bible) did not exist? Like the fact that at the time Jericho was supposedly destroyed by the Israelites the city had already been in ruins for quite some time? Like the fact that at the supposed time of Jesus' birth there simply was no city of Nazareth at the place the bible says it was?
Absilio Mundus!

I can do no wrong. For I do not know what it is.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5058
  • Darwins +578/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #384 on: March 23, 2012, 07:08:17 PM »
Evidence that God created science?  Biblical accuracy and historical accuracy prove the Bible's infallibility.
I would ask if you were joking, but I'm quite well aware that far too many Christians blindly believe in the Bible's so-called "accuracy" with no evidence whatsoever.  The "God-breathed" verse is meaningless babble which has been used to deceive Christians like you for almost two thousand years, and there is nothing else in the Bible which vouches for its accuracy.  And while I don't deny that certain parts of the Bible have historical relevance, that does not mean that they are accurate.

Quote from: rockv12
But since you asked, and it's the evolution thread here, isn't it obvious?  Such order and complexity and perfection in life and our physical world should make one go, "Hmmm?"  Design needs a designer.  I don't know what world that this fact doesn't apply...
"Perfection".  You do realize that neither life, nor the physical world, is anything even remotely close to "perfect", and never was to begin with?  And neither order nor complexity must be designed, therefore neither need a designer.

In short, none of the evidence you've provided is appropriate.  If you wish to prove that God created science, you must find something in science which unquestionably shows God's hand at work.  Saying, "it's ordered, it's complex" doesn't qualify because the way the universe is ordered and the complexity it shows are both much more easily explained by chaos theory than by the hand of a deity.

Offline rockv12

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Darwins +3/-44
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #385 on: March 25, 2012, 12:27:23 AM »

"Perfection".  You do realize that neither life, nor the physical world, is anything even remotely close to "perfect", and never was to begin with?  And neither order nor complexity must be designed, therefore neither need a designer.

In short, none of the evidence you've provided is appropriate.  If you wish to prove that God created science, you must find something in science which unquestionably shows God's hand at work.  Saying, "it's ordered, it's complex" doesn't qualify because the way the universe is ordered and the complexity it shows are both much more easily explained by chaos theory than by the hand of a deity.

If you can't hold a newborn baby and be blown away, then I don't know what else to say....

Offline rockv12

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Darwins +3/-44
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #386 on: March 25, 2012, 12:30:30 AM »
Evidence that God created science?  Biblical accuracy and historical accuracy prove the Bible's infallibility.

Circular argument.

  But since you asked, and it's the evolution thread here, isn't it obvious?  Such order and complexity and perfection in life and our physical world should make one go, "Hmmm?"  Design needs a designer.  I don't know what world that this fact doesn't apply...
 

Argument from Ignorance.

No evidence for anything, just statements that prove nothing more than an inability to think logically or critically.

Saying it's an "argument from ignorance" does NOT make it an untrue argument.  "We don't know who killed Mr. John Q. Public, so we know that it must be nobody."  Is that an argument from ignorance? 

But we have TONS of evidence!  That's the point!  Evidence all around us that something greater than chance and science could create!

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12432
  • Darwins +289/-32
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #387 on: March 25, 2012, 12:39:51 AM »
If you can't hold a newborn baby and be blown away, then I don't know what else to say....

Relevance?
I have not encountered any mechanical malfunctioning in my spirit.  It works every single time I need it to.

Online Aaron123

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2770
  • Darwins +77/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #388 on: March 25, 2012, 12:43:33 AM »

Saying it's an "argument from ignorance" does NOT make it an untrue argument.  "We don't know who killed Mr. John Q. Public, so we know that it must be nobody."  Is that an argument from ignorance? 

Your argument refute itself.  Your statement is that John Q. has been "killed", meaning there is sufficient evidence to think he did not die from natural causes, accidental poisoning, or suicide.  For someone to be "killed", that requires another person or animal to do the deed.

Quote
But we have TONS of evidence!  That's the point!  Evidence all around us that something greater than chance and science could create!

So what is the "tons of evidence"?  I hear this all the time, but theists never present them.

Can you actually provide this supposed evidence?  It need to avoid:

-Appeal to ignorant
-Appeal to incredulously
-God of the gaps.
-Appeal to emotion

If you can avoid all of those, then maybe you'll have something worth considering.
Being a Christian, I've made my decision. That decision offers no compromise; therefore, I'm closed to anything else.

Offline JeffPT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2093
  • Darwins +236/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a lead farmer mutha fucka
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #389 on: March 25, 2012, 12:46:41 AM »
If you can't hold a newborn baby and be blown away, then I don't know what else to say....

Your emotional appeal may fly with your friends and other religious whack jobs, but every atheist on this website knows that if you're resorting to argumentation like this, you're losing the battle badly.  There is nothing to this at all.  jaimehlers made a solid argument and you had nothing to go on but your emotions.  Next time something like this happens, you should  just say, 'you're right and I'm wrong'.  At least that would be taking it like a man. 

But we have TONS of evidence!  That's the point!  Evidence all around us that something greater than chance and science could create!


No, we don't rockv.  And the difference lies in our knowledge base.  You see, when you start to understand the way science works, and that all the things around you were created by natural forces, all the evidence you think you have that something greater plays a role in our universe begins to disappear.  For example: I like to use lightning.  In the past, people used to think lightning was exactly what you say... evidence that something greater created it.  But when you look at lightning and find that it is nothing more than natural forces at work, you realize that something greater doesn't have to be at play.  Now, once you understand that, you should know that this same process happens with millions and millions of other things too. 

The more you know about how things REALLY work, the less you see everything around you as evidence that something greater is afoot.  It's really that simple.  If you had that understanding, you'd probably never again say that there is evidence for something greater. 
Whenever events that are purported to occur in our best interest are as numerous as the events that will just as soon kill us, then intent is hard, if not impossible to assert. NDT

Offline rockv12

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Darwins +3/-44
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #390 on: March 25, 2012, 01:02:09 AM »
If you can't hold a newborn baby and be blown away, then I don't know what else to say....

Your emotional appeal may fly with your friends and other religious whack jobs, but every atheist on this website knows that if you're resorting to argumentation like this, you're losing the battle badly.  There is nothing to this at all.  jaimehlers made a solid argument and you had nothing to go on but your emotions.  Next time something like this happens, you should  just say, 'you're right and I'm wrong'.  At least that would be taking it like a man. 

But we have TONS of evidence!  That's the point!  Evidence all around us that something greater than chance and science could create!


No, we don't rockv.  And the difference lies in our knowledge base.  You see, when you start to understand the way science works, and that all the things around you were created by natural forces, all the evidence you think you have that something greater plays a role in our universe begins to disappear.  For example: I like to use lightning.  In the past, people used to think lightning was exactly what you say... evidence that something greater created it.  But when you look at lightning and find that it is nothing more than natural forces at work, you realize that something greater doesn't have to be at play.  Now, once you understand that, you should know that this same process happens with millions and millions of other things too. 

The more you know about how things REALLY work, the less you see everything around you as evidence that something greater is afoot.  It's really that simple.  If you had that understanding, you'd probably never again say that there is evidence for something greater.

And nobody can explain how sexual reproduction evolved...

And nobody can explain how natural forces created everything around us....   Hmmmm...  I've asked time and time again for some answers how things evolved and guess what?  Nobody can answer these questions.  I understand how science works and there are so many questions without answers you must ask yourself "how possible is this?".   

Now explain to me how sexual reproduction evolved....  I mean if holding a newborn baby is about as thrilling as receiving the TV Guide in the mail, then go ahead, explain it. 

Online Aaron123

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2770
  • Darwins +77/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #391 on: March 25, 2012, 01:18:20 AM »
Quote
And nobody can explain how sexual reproduction evolved...

And nobody can explain how natural forces created everything around us....   Hmmmm...  I've asked time and time again for some answers how things evolved and guess what?  Nobody can answer these questions.  I understand how science works and there are so many questions without answers you must ask yourself "how possible is this?".   

Now explain to me how sexual reproduction evolved....  I mean if holding a newborn baby is about as thrilling as receiving the TV Guide in the mail, then go ahead, explain it. 


http://lmgtfy.com/?q=evolution+of+sexual+reproduction


But of course, if no one can explain, that must mean a magic man done it, right?
Being a Christian, I've made my decision. That decision offers no compromise; therefore, I'm closed to anything else.

Offline DumpsterFire

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 383
  • Darwins +61/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • The Flaming Duck of Death!
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #392 on: March 25, 2012, 02:47:22 AM »
...after her parents sold her soul to Satan when she was a child...

Damn, dude, did they at least get a receipt?

I'm hesitant to ask this due to the convoluted mess of hooey that is sure to follow, but please tell me:
     a. How does a parent determine that the time has come to sell their child's soul to the devil?
     b. Did they try to sell it to god first and he wasn't interested?
     c. How does such a transaction take place? Does satan negotiate? What's the going rate on kid's souls these days?
     d. How is it that such an agreement can be easily (linebacker tossing aside) reversed by a simple exorcism?
     e. Why would your god ever allow anyone to sell an innocent child's soul? I guess a person should be able to sell his own soul, but how does anyone ever have the right to bargain with someone else's?

These questions (though valid) are mostly in jest, but I am absolutely serious about the last one. Why does your god allow parents to sell their children's souls?
Providing rednecks with sunblock since 1996.

I once met a man who claimed to be a genius, then boasted that he was a member of "Mesa".

Think for yourself.

Offline DumpsterFire

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 383
  • Darwins +61/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • The Flaming Duck of Death!
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #393 on: March 25, 2012, 02:59:49 AM »
Saying it's an "argument from ignorance" does NOT make it an untrue argument.  "We don't know who killed Mr. John Q. Public, so we know that it must be nobody."  Is that an argument from ignorance?

No, it is an example from ignorance. Assuming Mr. Public was actually murdered, a rational person would say, "We don't know who killed him, but we know it must be somebody." A rational person would not say, "We don't know who killed him, therefore it must have been demons."
Providing rednecks with sunblock since 1996.

I once met a man who claimed to be a genius, then boasted that he was a member of "Mesa".

Think for yourself.

Offline monkeymind

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2592
  • Darwins +44/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I don't understand what I know about it!
    • How To Know If You Are A Real Christian
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #394 on: March 25, 2012, 06:58:26 AM »
Rocky:
Quote
Gosh, I don't think anything would be good enough for you to believe in a God.  If God Himself walked into your room at night and talked to you in plain English, you'd attibute it to something else other than God.
Gosh, you're right!
Gods and demons don't make sense. They are neither reasonable or rational.
If you are saying you have seen demons, I would have to have a rational explanation before even considering a claim like this.
Truthfinder:the birds adapt and change through million of years in order to survive ,is that science, then cats should evolve also wings to better catch the birds
Mailbag:On a side note, back in college before my conversion, I actually saw a demon sitting next to me in critical thinking class.

Offline JeffPT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2093
  • Darwins +236/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a lead farmer mutha fucka
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #395 on: March 25, 2012, 07:04:50 AM »
And nobody can explain how natural forces created everything around us....   

Yes, we can.  We absolutely can.  There are still some things for which we can't YET, but the vast, vast majority of things are currently explainable in natural terms.  What do you want to know about?  How planets form?  How stars form?  Black holes?  Weather patterns?  What?   

Hmmmm...  I've asked time and time again for some answers how things evolved and guess what?  Nobody can answer these questions. 

You're inability to grasp the simplicity and beauty of evolution is nothing more than your own ignorance.  There are millions and millions of people who accept evolution, including millions of Christians just like you.  The only reasons people have to deny evolution is an ignorance of the process or because it doesn't fit with their religious world view.  You've got both. 

We can answer questions about evolution.  Those answers are out there for you to learn.  It's one of the most well supported theories in all of science.  This is why we accept it.  Not because we need something in order to reject your world view, or because we hate God, or because science has some sort of anti-religious agenda, but because it actually works extremely well at explaining how the facts of our world fit together naturally and has never been falsified (even though it could, unlike the god theory).   

I understand how science works and there are so many questions without answers you must ask yourself "how possible is this?".   

There may always be questions that remain unanswered, but you fail to recognize just how many questions HAVE been answered.  That's what the difference is between the way you approach these questions and the way we approach them.  There HAVE been answers.  Literally millions of them.  More than enough to understand that god isn't necessary to explain anything anymore. 

Now explain to me how sexual reproduction evolved....  I mean if holding a newborn baby is about as thrilling as receiving the TV Guide in the mail, then go ahead, explain it.

Aaron provided you with a link.  That's pretty much all I would do as well. 

I don't understand the relevance of your emotional appeal with holding babies.  What are you trying to prove with that?  We evolved to love our children.  Every social species did.  If we didn't, then our species would have babies and abandon them immediately, thus ensuring the demise of all humans.   Simply put, if we didn't evolve a genetic propensity to care for our young, we would no longer be here to explain it to you.

Whenever events that are purported to occur in our best interest are as numerous as the events that will just as soon kill us, then intent is hard, if not impossible to assert. NDT

Offline Tero

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 726
  • Darwins +18/-5
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #396 on: March 25, 2012, 07:17:15 AM »

And nobody can explain how sexual reproduction evolved...

And nobody can explain how natural forces created everything around us....   Hmmmm...  I've asked time and time again for some answers how things evolved and guess what?  Nobody can answer these questions.  I understand how science works and there are so many questions without answers you must ask yourself "how possible is this?".   

Now explain to me how sexual reproduction evolved....  I mean if holding a newborn baby is about as thrilling as receiving the TV Guide in the mail, then go ahead, explain it.
We've explained all those things. You can look them up yourself as well. But I guess you do not read the posts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_sexual_reproduction

Offline pianodwarf

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 4371
  • Darwins +208/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Je bois ton lait frappĂ©
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #397 on: March 25, 2012, 07:22:29 AM »
And nobody can explain how natural forces created everything around us....   Hmmmm...  I've asked time and time again for some answers how things evolved and guess what?  Nobody can answer these questions.  I understand how science works and there are so many questions without answers you must ask yourself "how possible is this".

You appear to be presupposing that if science cannot explain something, it must mean that a supernatural force is at work.  (Actually, what you're really saying is that if science cannot explain something, it must mean that Jesus died for our sins; however, very few theists are willing to admit that that's what they're saying because they know how ridiculous it sounds.)

Case in point: the sun's energy output.

The amount of energy generated by the sun was accurately calculated some centuries ago.  Science checked and rechecked its calculations, sure that there must be an error somewhere, because there was no natural phenomenon known at the time that could possibly generate that much energy.  If, for example, the sun were a solid lump of coal, it would burn itself out completely in just a few thousand years.  This had everyone stumped for a very long time.

Had we been having this discussion back then, you would have undoubtedly jumped up and down screaming that this meant that a supernatural explanation was the only one possible, just as you're doing now with the evolution of sexual reproduction.  Only thing is, dagnabbit... the sun's super-powerful energy output does have a natural explanation.  Science just didn't know what it was for a long time because fusion wasn't discovered until the early 20th century.

You might want to keep this kind of thing in mind when you're using a "god of the gaps" argument, even if you're not willing to admit that it's a logical fallacy.
[On how kangaroos could have gotten back to Australia after the flood]:  Don't kangaroos skip along the surface of the water? --Kenn

Offline rockv12

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Darwins +3/-44
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #398 on: March 25, 2012, 09:20:45 AM »
And nobody can explain how natural forces created everything around us....   Hmmmm...  I've asked time and time again for some answers how things evolved and guess what?  Nobody can answer these questions.  I understand how science works and there are so many questions without answers you must ask yourself "how possible is this".

You appear to be presupposing that if science cannot explain something, it must mean that a supernatural force is at work.  (Actually, what you're really saying is that if science cannot explain something, it must mean that Jesus died for our sins; however, very few theists are willing to admit that that's what they're saying because they know how ridiculous it sounds.)

Case in point: the sun's energy output.

The amount of energy generated by the sun was accurately calculated some centuries ago.  Science checked and rechecked its calculations, sure that there must be an error somewhere, because there was no natural phenomenon known at the time that could possibly generate that much energy.  If, for example, the sun were a solid lump of coal, it would burn itself out completely in just a few thousand years.  This had everyone stumped for a very long time.

Had we been having this discussion back then, you would have undoubtedly jumped up and down screaming that this meant that a supernatural explanation was the only one possible, just as you're doing now with the evolution of sexual reproduction.  Only thing is, dagnabbit... the sun's super-powerful energy output does have a natural explanation.  Science just didn't know what it was for a long time because fusion wasn't discovered until the early 20th century.

You might want to keep this kind of thing in mind when you're using a "god of the gaps" argument, even if you're not willing to admit that it's a logical fallacy.

Jumping up and down screaming that the only logical answer is that the supernatural must be at work?  I understand that some things we are still learning about, geez.  But that's NOT the point.  You just said yourself, and made the point, that we CAN'T jump to conclusions and assume that something must be impossible because we don't seem to have the evidence.  So why do you assume there is NO God?

Now again, if evolution is so easy to understand, and fact (not theory), then explain how sexual reproduction evolved.  After that, you can tackle the countless other examples of life that have NO explanation for evolution.  Then you can explain to me how the Big Bang occurred. Then you can explain how everything came to be into existence.  I mean, I need proof to believe in evolution.  Prove it.

Offline pianodwarf

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 4371
  • Darwins +208/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Je bois ton lait frappĂ©
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #399 on: March 25, 2012, 09:25:24 AM »
So why do you assume there is NO God?

Why do you assume there is NO Flying Spaghetti Monster?

Quote
Now again, if evolution is so easy to understand, and fact (not theory), then explain how sexual reproduction evolved.

As the lawyers say in the police procedurals: "Objection, your honor.  Asked and answered."

You've been given links to the information on this matter.  Go read them.

Quote
After that, you can tackle the countless other examples of life that have NO explanation for evolution.  Then you can explain to me how the Big Bang occurred. Then you can explain how everything came to be into existence.

Didn't I just warn you about the "god of the gaps"?

Quote
I mean, I need proof to believe in evolution.  Prove it.

Do you also need proof to believe in gravity?
[On how kangaroos could have gotten back to Australia after the flood]:  Don't kangaroos skip along the surface of the water? --Kenn

Offline HAL

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5017
  • Darwins +98/-17
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #400 on: March 25, 2012, 09:28:33 AM »
I mean, I need proof to believe in evolution.  Prove it.

Proofs are for mathematics. What you should be asking for is evidence, not proof, and there are mountains of it available. The overwhelming evidence points to evolution being true.

By the way - I just sent you a PM regarding nested quotes. Please heed it

Offline jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5058
  • Darwins +578/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #401 on: March 25, 2012, 09:37:56 AM »
If you can't hold a newborn baby and be blown away, then I don't know what else to say....
Blown away by what, precisely?  Like most people, I find babies to be emotionally stirring, but that doesn't mean I think that some god personally fashions each and every infant creature.  As you apparently do.  So this is another argument from ignorance.

Saying it's an "argument from ignorance" does NOT make it an untrue argument.  "We don't know who killed Mr. John Q. Public, so we know that it must be nobody."  Is that an argument from ignorance?
Why yes, it is.  It's basically saying, "we don't know the circumstances of his death, therefore nobody killed him".  And while it isn't technically "untrue", because the argument might potentially be correct, it's no better than a shot in the dark.  Yeah, sure, you might hit something with that shot, but most likely you'll just waste your ammo.  Same thing with arguments from ignorance.  If they end up being correct, it's by accident, and we can do better than that.

Quote from: rockv12
But we have TONS of evidence!  That's the point!  Evidence all around us that something greater than chance and science could create!
Yet you can't actually elaborate on any of that evidence, can you?  That is to say, you can't point to any particular thing and prove that it was made by a god.  You have to claim that it's too "complex", or that the evidence is "obvious", or whatever other rationales you come up with.  That's why it's an argument from ignorance; that's why nobody here is willing to give credence to what you're asserting.

And nobody can explain how sexual reproduction evolved...
Actually, it's already been explained.  What is sex but the exchange of genetic information between individuals?  But instead of changing the organisms themselves, the genetic information forms a new organism.  Once you understand that, the rest falls into place, because all forms of sexual reproduction are just variations on that general theme.

Quote from: rockv12
And nobody can explain how natural forces created everything around us....   Hmmmm...  I've asked time and time again for some answers how things evolved and guess what?  Nobody can answer these questions.  I understand how science works and there are so many questions without answers you must ask yourself "how possible is this?".
No, you don't really understand how science works.  You've proved this over and over again through the way you act, the fact that you haven't actually bothered to try to show that you understand it.  There's no shame in admitting that you don't really know something all that well, unless you bluster and pretend that you do when it's obvious you don't.  It isn't that nobody's answered your questions, it's that you literally aren't competent to judge the accuracy of those answers.  Therefore, you don't trust those answers and claim that they aren't answers at all.

Quote from: rockv12
Now explain to me how sexual reproduction evolved....  I mean if holding a newborn baby is about as thrilling as receiving the TV Guide in the mail, then go ahead, explain it.
The fact that I understand the biological forces which cause humans to be thrilled when holding or seeing a newborn baby, the fact that I understand the biological forces which caused that newborn baby to grow from that clump of undifferentiated cells, doesn't make any of that less awe-inspiring.  Knowing the actual reason why is far more impressive than simply thinking of babies as gifts from God.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2012, 09:40:51 AM by jaimehlers »

Online Aaron123

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2770
  • Darwins +77/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #402 on: March 25, 2012, 09:38:19 AM »
Jumping up and down screaming that the only logical answer is that the supernatural must be at work?  I understand that some things we are still learning about, geez.  But that's NOT the point.  You just said yourself, and made the point, that we CAN'T jump to conclusions and assume that something must be impossible because we don't seem to have the evidence.  So why do you assume there is NO God?

We assume that there is no god because there are no evidence for such a thing.  Assuming there is a god would be an example of jumping to conclusion.  You claim there is evidence, but thus far, you have failed to provide it.  Thus far, all I've seen from you are argument from ignorant, incredulously, emotional appeal, and god of the gaps mentality.  For your "evidence" to be worth considering, it needs to avoid all of those.  Can you do that?


Quote
Now again, if evolution is so easy to understand, and fact (not theory),

Something tells me that you don't know what the word theory means in this context.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory#Scientific_theories


Quote
then explain how sexual reproduction evolved.

We've already did, and provided links.  You're just pretending that none of this is explainable.

Of course, just in case you missed it...

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=evolution+of+sexual+reproduction


Quote
After that, you can tackle the countless other examples of life that have NO explanation for evolution. 


I'm not sure what this is asking.  Did you mean "there are life forms that evolution cannot explain"?  If so, what are examples of such?


Quote
Then you can explain to me how the Big Bang occurred.  Then you can explain how everything came to be into existence.  I mean, I need proof to believe in evolution.  Prove it.

Why the big topic shift?  The big bang has nothing to do with evolution.

If you're so stingy about evolution and the big bang, then why don't you apply that towards your god?
Being a Christian, I've made my decision. That decision offers no compromise; therefore, I'm closed to anything else.

Offline ungod

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 580
  • Darwins +15/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #403 on: March 25, 2012, 10:14:04 AM »
Now again, if evolution is so easy to understand, and fact (not theory), then explain how sexual reproduction evolved.

Russel's flying teapot, in orbit between Saturn and Jupiter, willed it to evolve. Prove I'm wrong.

Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has.
Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding. - Martin Luther

"What good fortune for those in power that people do not think." - Hitler

Offline rockv12

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Darwins +3/-44
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #404 on: March 25, 2012, 07:03:14 PM »

We assume that there is no god because there are no evidence for such a thing.  Assuming there is a god would be an example of jumping to conclusion.  You claim there is evidence, but thus far, you have failed to provide it.  Thus far, all I've seen from you are argument from ignorant, incredulously, emotional appeal, and god of the gaps mentality.  For your "evidence" to be worth considering, it needs to avoid all of those.  Can you do that?


I would think evidence for a God would be in what we see.  We DO see life.  We see the eye, the brain, the sexual organs, we see DNA, we see such marvelous structures that it is mind-blowing how they work! 

What we DON'T see are animals turning into other animals and evolving.  NEVER have we seen that. 

So what's more plausible to believe in?  That it evolved?  ZERO evidence, since we have NOT seen it happen, OR believe that something created the order and complexity that we see? 

With this "designer" or "creator", whatever/whoever it may be, we might see other proofs of it's existence.  Now shall we look at the Bible for that second part to my belief?  The life and death of Jesus Christ prove God's existence along with creation.

You gave a link for how sexual reproduction evolved.  It was a link for a google search.  Gee, really?  There's links for everything on the internet.  I asked that you explain how it evolved.  Step by step.  NOBODY has been able to do that in here.  NOBODY wants to talk about it, but they refer to how simple evolution is.

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #405 on: March 25, 2012, 07:04:29 PM »
I would think evidence for a God would be in what we see.

And that is evidenced of a god claim how?
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me