Author Topic: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge  (Read 19344 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online DVZ3

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1362
  • Darwins +41/-8
  • Gender: Male
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #493 on: March 10, 2014, 09:48:04 AM »
Religious bullshit is like malware to a computer.

For example: Jesuis and skeptic are trying to execute code into your operating system, would you like to block this code or continue to execute?

I've already examined your code base on your responses. Your code/message is filled with holes and lies - you are a liar and if you are not my computer knows better than even you do about yourself.

Please don't infect me or my computer.
Hguols: "Its easier for me to believe that a God created everything...."

Offline Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2729
  • Darwins +222/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburger™
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #494 on: March 10, 2014, 09:50:45 AM »
I know you hold otherwise, but you've argued yourself into a corner that you simply can't get out of, because by ruling out the probability that material objects actually do exist without a mind, you've also ruled out any possibility of finding evidence that might support your position.

He doesn't hold otherwise. He is a materialist, because his God says that he created the universe. He just has some perverse idea that atheists should only be solipsists.

The only reason we are talking about it again, is because I had the temerity to explain to you what a Berkley Skeptic is, (which is what he says he is, and derives his name from)(but doesn't believe personally anyway.)

I explained this to autotroll, before:

If I live in a solipsist world, then his God gave me a Bible, telling me that the world exists, and was created in 7 days. Therefore God in my world is a liar.

If I live in a material world, then I can check facts against what God says in the Bible. And God is a liar in this world, too.


Skep originally thought that he could evade atheists observing material facts, by pulling the solipsist card. Since facts prove bible-God doesn't exist, then facts for atheists must be false.

I put it in big red writing, because Skep can't read small writing.
Humans, in general, don't waste any opportunity to be unfathomably stupid - Dr Cynical.

Offline Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2729
  • Darwins +222/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburger™
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #495 on: March 10, 2014, 09:55:13 AM »

Religion is a virus that has no basis to be programmed. The outcome will be the result naturally unless a virus interrupts the system.


Well, no because most viruses are malicious. Virus writers have lots of criminal reasons to do it.

Religion fills a vacuum. The vacuum has to be filled. Even when people reject Christianity, they tend to pick up New Age shit, or start believing in Scientology or Eck.
Humans, in general, don't waste any opportunity to be unfathomably stupid - Dr Cynical.

Online jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2106
  • Darwins +376/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #496 on: March 10, 2014, 09:57:23 AM »
^Even though, logically, if things can only exist within a mind, even other minds, then a deity's mind must exist inside of something else.

I think skeptic knows this.  He just doesn't want to deal with it, thus why he arbitrarily assumes that his god is exempt from the logic he so painstakingly drew up.  A textbook case of special pleadingWiki.

Yeah - I'm pretty sure this is the second thread where I've asked what mind or what reality god's mind occupies.  I doubt I'll get a response.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4936
  • Darwins +563/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #497 on: March 10, 2014, 04:00:12 PM »
Religion fills a vacuum. The vacuum has to be filled. Even when people reject Christianity, they tend to pick up New Age shit, or start believing in Scientology or Eck.
Right, and the same goes for other religions as well.  I think it's ultimately based in the human desire to understand things, or at least to believe that one understands things.

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11041
  • Darwins +285/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #498 on: March 10, 2014, 04:39:26 PM »
It's amazing how skeptic54768 always manages to "miss" all the posts or parts of posts with the best arguments and instead focuses on minute things. Until everyone is making the best possible arguments, after which he "vanishes" mysteriously from the thread and rewrites the same arguments on a different thread, thus restarting the cycle of getting his ass kicked.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline SevenPatch

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 704
  • Darwins +108/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • A source will help me understand.
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #499 on: March 10, 2014, 05:25:14 PM »
Religion fills a vacuum. The vacuum has to be filled. Even when people reject Christianity, they tend to pick up New Age shit, or start believing in Scientology or Eck.
Right, and the same goes for other religions as well.  I think it's ultimately based in the human desire to understand things, or at least to believe that one understands things.

I think fear is a major part of it.  Fear of not knowing.  Fear of not being in control.  This fear might either be conscious or subconscious.  For a theist, they fear not being in control or not knowing everything so "God" alleviates that fear by catching the theist.  If something doesn't make sense well then "it is all part of God's plan".  Don't worry too much about that because "God's way of thinking is above humans way of thinking". If the believer doesn't have control, doesn't know something or doesn't understand something then the believer can be secure that "God" does have control, knows everything and understands everything.  I used to be a theist, I myself was comforted knowing "God" had a plan and was in control.

Of course, psychology could be a big part as well since we know that the human mind fills in or ignores the gaps in our perception, knowledge and memories.  It makes connections where none should exist.  The human mind does the best it can with the information it has to work with all in order to make reality more coherent because the human mind is not capable of perceiving everything, know everything and remember everything.

NOTE: I'm sure a believer will look at what I said I think here and think to themselves "look at this jerk SevenPatch, he thinks I have some kind of fear or psychological problem and he thinks he is better than theists".

Look, I'm not saying I'm better than anyone, and I'm certainly not saying atheism is better than theism.  All humans have fears.  I have fears, not being in control is one of those fears.  I would ask any theist to be honest with themselves about the fear of not being in control and that it is comforting to know "God" is in control.   The way the human mind works is generally the same for everyone in regards to filling in the gaps of perception, knowledge and memory (including my mind).

It wasn't realizing that my fear was being alleviated by my belief in "God" that led me to atheism.  It wasn't understanding human psychology that led me to atheism.  I really didn't think about these things until after I realized I didn't believe in a god.  No, there were many things which led me to a position of atheism.

Sorry that this was a bit off topic from the OP, but I think this thread was set up to fail from the beginning.
"Shut him up! We have a lot invested in this ride - SHUT HIM UP! Look at my furrows of worry! Look at my big bank account, and my family! This just HAS to be real!" - Bill Hicks

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12525
  • Darwins +324/-84
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #500 on: March 10, 2014, 05:48:42 PM »
It's amazing how skeptic54768 always manages to "miss" all the posts or parts of posts with the best arguments and instead focuses on minute things. Until everyone is making the best possible arguments, after which he "vanishes" mysteriously from the thread and rewrites the same arguments on a different thread, thus restarting the cycle of getting his ass kicked.

Do what you know.

-Nam
This thread is about lab-grown dicks, not some mincy, old, British poof of an actor. 

Let's get back on topic, please.


Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11041
  • Darwins +285/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #501 on: March 10, 2014, 06:21:02 PM »
Do what you know.

In skeptic54768's case, it appears to be "do nothing".

-Nam

-One
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline OldChurchGuy

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1529
  • Darwins +101/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • One of those theists who enjoys exchanging ideas
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #502 on: March 10, 2014, 06:27:38 PM »
Jerry BergmanWiki Gosh he looks really like he represents the mainstream in science today! The PhD from Columbia Pacific UniversityWiki looks like it must have been hard to get!

With all due respect, I'm not sure the credentials are as important as the content of the writing. 

Sincerely,

OldChurchGuy

Quote
There are places which sell fake qualifications for a single term's work (about three months). The honesty and ability of anyone who takes these qualifications is compromised. They cannot be taken seriously.

Interesting.  So the content can be simply rejected out of hand?

Ever curious,

OldChurchGuy

Would you want to be treated by a doctor who had fake qualifications?

Meaning no disrespect but answering a question with a question does not give me an answer.

Sincerely,

OldChurchGuy
Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a great battle - Philo of Alexandria

Whether one believes in a religion or not, and whether one believes in rebirth or not, there isn't anyone who doesn't appreciate kindness and compassion - Dalai Lama

Offline SevenPatch

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 704
  • Darwins +108/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • A source will help me understand.
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #503 on: March 10, 2014, 06:39:47 PM »
But, remember Stalin, Pol Pot, saw religion as foolish and for morons. That's why they tried to get rid of it. I doubt they were trolling. It sounds heartless and emotionless to brush it off as trolls when millions of people actually suffered the wrath of these real life killings.

So, okay, Stalin and Pol Pot treated people of religion very poorly.  What exactly does that mean to you?  How exactly does that affect atheism?

Stalin and Pol Pot were both dictators.

Do you think they would have behaved any differently if they were Christians?

Perhaps they would have been like Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany (Evangelical Christian Church) who's rule resulted in the deaths of millions. 

Or maybe they would have been like Nicholas II of Russia (Russian Orthodox Christian) who was nicknamed Bloody Nicholas for the deaths of millions.

Then perhaps they might have been like Leopold II of Belgium (Roman Catholic) who is notorious for killing or enslaving 15 million people in Congo (all at the turn of the 20th century). 

Dictators usually kill people in order to gain power or stay in power, regardless of their religion (or lack of it) or anyone elses religion (or lack of it).

"Shut him up! We have a lot invested in this ride - SHUT HIM UP! Look at my furrows of worry! Look at my big bank account, and my family! This just HAS to be real!" - Bill Hicks

Offline Foxy Freedom

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1449
  • Darwins +99/-12
  • Why is it so difficult to say you don't know?
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #504 on: March 10, 2014, 06:48:38 PM »
Jerry BergmanWiki Gosh he looks really like he represents the mainstream in science today! The PhD from Columbia Pacific UniversityWiki looks like it must have been hard to get!

With all due respect, I'm not sure the credentials are as important as the content of the writing. 

Sincerely,

OldChurchGuy

Quote
There are places which sell fake qualifications for a single term's work (about three months). The honesty and ability of anyone who takes these qualifications is compromised. They cannot be taken seriously.

Interesting.  So the content can be simply rejected out of hand?

Ever curious,

OldChurchGuy

Would you want to be treated by a doctor who had fake qualifications?

Meaning no disrespect but answering a question with a question does not give me an answer.

Sincerely,

OldChurchGuy

And Jesus answered "Why...." "What...." "Who...."

Tell that to the writers of the NT.

But just to please you... I would not go to a doctor with fake qualifications because my chances would not be good, when I can go to a real doctor. I would not read anything by a fake researcher when my chances of learning something are better with a genuine researcher. Any good idea will become mainstream among genuine researchers.

If you look at the qualifications of researchers of intelligent design you will find that they are over represented by people with fake qualifications.

Statistically fake researchers will go in the wrong direction. Even people with genuine qualifications do not always stay on track. That is why majority expert opinion is important.

« Last Edit: March 10, 2014, 07:18:20 PM by Foxy Freedom »
Neither Foxy Freedom nor any associates can be reached via WWGHA. Their official antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V

Offline SevenPatch

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 704
  • Darwins +108/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • A source will help me understand.
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #505 on: March 10, 2014, 06:54:17 PM »
Interesting.  So the content can be simply rejected out of hand?

Ever curious,

OldChurchGuy

Would you want to be treated by a doctor who had fake qualifications?

Meaning no disrespect but answering a question with a question does not give me an answer.

Sincerely,

OldChurchGuy

I personally don't know if the content can be rejected out of hand per se, but it is pretty close.  Given the questionable qualifications and likely agenda of the author it makes the content unreliable unless it is personally verified.

If we want to consider the content reliable, we'd have to research every aspect of it to confirm or challenge the content.  Considering the overwhelming consensus of the scientific community in support of the ToE, it seems unlikely that the ToE does not have some involvement across many fields of science. 

Additionally, there are doubts about whether the author actually understands the ToE.  He may have not properly recognized what was regarding the ToE or may have intentionally left out information regarding the ToE.
"Shut him up! We have a lot invested in this ride - SHUT HIM UP! Look at my furrows of worry! Look at my big bank account, and my family! This just HAS to be real!" - Bill Hicks

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4936
  • Darwins +563/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #506 on: March 10, 2014, 08:17:11 PM »
Foxy Freedom, I think the point is that you need to show that he did in fact earn those credentials from a diploma mill or the like.  Simply assuming that someone who supports the ID movement has fraudulent academic credentials is sloppy.  It would be the same if one stated that an argument supporting ID was bad without showing why.

Offline Foxy Freedom

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1449
  • Darwins +99/-12
  • Why is it so difficult to say you don't know?
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #507 on: March 10, 2014, 08:28:39 PM »
Foxy Freedom, I think the point is that you need to show that he did in fact earn those credentials from a diploma mill or the like.  Simply assuming that someone who supports the ID movement has fraudulent academic credentials is sloppy.  It would be the same if one stated that an argument supporting ID was bad without showing why.

 His university was closed down for being substandard. Some people were given PhDs in one year. The link has already been posted above. The question was about whether having fake qualifications mattered.
Neither Foxy Freedom nor any associates can be reached via WWGHA. Their official antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V

Offline skeptic54768

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2665
  • Darwins +52/-438
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #508 on: March 11, 2014, 12:12:58 AM »
His university was closed down for being substandard. Some people were given PhDs in one year. The link has already been posted above. The question was about whether having fake qualifications mattered.

Ah, so it has. Does this mean that ANYTHING he says automatically can't be trusted?
What if atheistic scientists test his stuff and find out he's right?

For example, in the "moon is young" argument, he said that Tim Thompson of talkorigns assumed the continents were positioned a certain way millions of years ago in order to prove the moon is old. But the fact is that NOBODY KNOWS how the continents were positioned millions of years ago.

From the page:
http://www.trueorigin.org/moonmb.asp
"In fact, there was sufficient information in Thompson’s article to have cast grave doubts on Hansen’s paper. This is noted in item 6 above where he says Hansen’s two models assumed one continent only at the pole and another at the equator—and that this is for “simplifying computations” and then adds the rider that the one continent idea “might not be all that bad”.

This is yet another deception. Placing one large continent at one pole and nowhere else is not just to make the maths easier, but is vital in getting the slower rate of retardation that is needed to obtain a long period of time that the moon has been receding from the earth. The reason is as follows.

If we imagine a smooth earth with no continents above the sea level, then the two tidal bulges would sweep around the earth with only a small degree of sea bed friction. This would give a long age for the moon as the retardation forces would be small.

Now allow one continent at one of the poles. The bulges would still be able to sweep around the earth and not meet any land barriers. So the resistance to them would be still be small and retardation would be small also—giving a long period before we reached the present situation.

Similarly, with one continent around the equator, the tidal bulges would still be free to sweep around the earth above and below this equatorial land mass, and again the retardation would be small. Thus, the position of the land mass, far from being for computational simplification, is a vital element in obtaining a long period of time.

Note that Thompson then suggests that such configurations “might not be all that bad.” Certainly, they would be very good news indeed if it is essential to have a model that gives the minimum retardation!"

How does one refute that solid knowledge?
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline skeptic54768

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2665
  • Darwins +52/-438
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #509 on: March 11, 2014, 12:18:55 AM »
But, remember Stalin, Pol Pot, saw religion as foolish and for morons. That's why they tried to get rid of it. I doubt they were trolling. It sounds heartless and emotionless to brush it off as trolls when millions of people actually suffered the wrath of these real life killings.

So, okay, Stalin and Pol Pot treated people of religion very poorly.  What exactly does that mean to you?  How exactly does that affect atheism?

Stalin and Pol Pot were both dictators.

Do you think they would have behaved any differently if they were Christians?

Perhaps they would have been like Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany (Evangelical Christian Church) who's rule resulted in the deaths of millions. 

Or maybe they would have been like Nicholas II of Russia (Russian Orthodox Christian) who was nicknamed Bloody Nicholas for the deaths of millions.

Then perhaps they might have been like Leopold II of Belgium (Roman Catholic) who is notorious for killing or enslaving 15 million people in Congo (all at the turn of the 20th century). 

Dictators usually kill people in order to gain power or stay in power, regardless of their religion (or lack of it) or anyone elses religion (or lack of it).

How many times must I say it?

Christians don't around killing people like a bunch of savage barbarians.
Christians want peace, harmony, and tolerance for all.
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline skeptic54768

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2665
  • Darwins +52/-438
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #510 on: March 11, 2014, 12:21:34 AM »
It's amazing how skeptic54768 always manages to "miss" all the posts or parts of posts with the best arguments and instead focuses on minute things. Until everyone is making the best possible arguments, after which he "vanishes" mysteriously from the thread and rewrites the same arguments on a different thread, thus restarting the cycle of getting his ass kicked.

I am very sorry that you feel this way. Since there are TONS of replies that I get and it is basically 1 man against 20, you can see how tiring and exhausting it would be.

If you feel that I have missed "the best arguments," then please post the post numbers that you feel are the best arguments and I will try to focus on those. I have no idea which arguments you deem as "the best."
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline skeptic54768

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2665
  • Darwins +52/-438
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #511 on: March 11, 2014, 12:23:41 AM »
I know you hold otherwise, but you've argued yourself into a corner that you simply can't get out of, because by ruling out the probability that material objects actually do exist without a mind, you've also ruled out any possibility of finding evidence that might support your position.

He doesn't hold otherwise. He is a materialist, because his God says that he created the universe. He just has some perverse idea that atheists should only be solipsists.

The only reason we are talking about it again, is because I had the temerity to explain to you what a Berkley Skeptic is, (which is what he says he is, and derives his name from)(but doesn't believe personally anyway.)

I explained this to autotroll, before:

If I live in a solipsist world, then his God gave me a Bible, telling me that the world exists, and was created in 7 days. Therefore God in my world is a liar.

If I live in a material world, then I can check facts against what God says in the Bible. And God is a liar in this world, too.


Skep originally thought that he could evade atheists observing material facts, by pulling the solipsist card. Since facts prove bible-God doesn't exist, then facts for atheists must be false.

I put it in big red writing, because Skep can't read small writing.

Why do I get called a troll when you are constantly misrepresenting my position?
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #512 on: March 11, 2014, 12:30:52 AM »
Evolution is the basis of our medical understand, it is due to our understanding of evolution that vaccines, anti retro viral drugs for aids exist etc....
If you don't accept evolution then you are a demonstrable fool. Plain and simple, and no one need listen to you because you're a nutjob.
Is our medical understanding helping us evolve or is it keep the status quo in place
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline skeptic54768

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2665
  • Darwins +52/-438
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #513 on: March 11, 2014, 12:31:13 AM »
Religious bullshit is like malware to a computer.

For example: Jesuis and skeptic are trying to execute code into your operating system, would you like to block this code or continue to execute?

I've already examined your code base on your responses. Your code/message is filled with holes and lies - you are a liar and if you are not my computer knows better than even you do about yourself.

Please don't infect me or my computer.

But, malware is removed from the computer. Are you saying that you want Christians removed from society? I would hope not, because that is getting into Nazi-like thinking.
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline Foxy Freedom

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1449
  • Darwins +99/-12
  • Why is it so difficult to say you don't know?
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #514 on: March 11, 2014, 12:32:50 AM »
His university was closed down for being substandard. Some people were given PhDs in one year. The link has already been posted above. The question was about whether having fake qualifications mattered.

Ah, so it has. Does this mean that ANYTHING he says automatically can't be trusted?
What if atheistic scientists test his stuff and find out he's right?

For example, in the "moon is young" argument, he said that Tim Thompson of talkorigns assumed the continents were positioned a certain way millions of years ago in order to prove the moon is old. But the fact is that NOBODY KNOWS how the continents were positioned millions of years ago.

From the page:
http://www.trueorigin.org/moonmb.asp
"In fact, there was sufficient information in Thompson’s article to have cast grave doubts on Hansen’s paper. This is noted in item 6 above where he says Hansen’s two models assumed one continent only at the pole and another at the equator—and that this is for “simplifying computations” and then adds the rider that the one continent idea “might not be all that bad”.

This is yet another deception. Placing one large continent at one pole and nowhere else is not just to make the maths easier, but is vital in getting the slower rate of retardation that is needed to obtain a long period of time that the moon has been receding from the earth. The reason is as follows.

If we imagine a smooth earth with no continents above the sea level, then the two tidal bulges would sweep around the earth with only a small degree of sea bed friction. This would give a long age for the moon as the retardation forces would be small.

Now allow one continent at one of the poles. The bulges would still be able to sweep around the earth and not meet any land barriers. So the resistance to them would be still be small and retardation would be small also—giving a long period before we reached the present situation.

Similarly, with one continent around the equator, the tidal bulges would still be free to sweep around the earth above and below this equatorial land mass, and again the retardation would be small. Thus, the position of the land mass, far from being for computational simplification, is a vital element in obtaining a long period of time.

Note that Thompson then suggests that such configurations “might not be all that bad.” Certainly, they would be very good news indeed if it is essential to have a model that gives the minimum retardation!"

How does one refute that solid knowledge?

As I mentioned in 504 good ideas will become mainstream. People who have genuine qualifications have the skills to work these things out, not the casual reader. That is why majority expert opinion is important.
Neither Foxy Freedom nor any associates can be reached via WWGHA. Their official antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V

Offline skeptic54768

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2665
  • Darwins +52/-438
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #515 on: March 11, 2014, 12:34:21 AM »
  Okay, so both atoms and baseballs exist outside your head. &)

Pain is a sensation that exists only in the mind so of course I would feel it. I feel pain but the baseball does not.
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #516 on: March 11, 2014, 12:35:47 AM »
Religious bullshit is like malware to a computer.
Says a lot about your parents and what your upbringing was like.
Maybe you have been influenced from birth in that way of thinking and acting.
How do you gain credibility from that statement?

According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline skeptic54768

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2665
  • Darwins +52/-438
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #517 on: March 11, 2014, 12:36:23 AM »
As I mentioned in 504 good ideas will become mainstream. People who have genuine qualifications have the skills to work these things out, not the casual reader. That is why majority expert opinion is important.

This would be true....unless they have a huge interest in defending their presupposition of Old Earth at any cost. Then, they would just ignore it.
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline skeptic54768

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2665
  • Darwins +52/-438
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #518 on: March 11, 2014, 12:40:28 AM »
And likewise, you can't get people to just accept that material things exist outside of minds.
I don't need people to accept that, though.  If they want to think that there's nothing but the mind, well, I find that kind of silly, but it doesn't bother me because they still have to play by the same rules that I do.  That's what science is about, discovering those rules and how they work, and how we can make use of them.

Quote from: skeptic54768
I guess we are on opposite sides of the fence locked in a standstill.
More accurately, you've fenced yourself into a specific belief and are zealously guarding your own fence from interlopers who might try to remove it.  And I'm on the outside, looking in.  That's what happens when you stop asking yourself if you could be wrong about your belief.

The fact is, I don't really consider immaterialism to be a viable position, especially since all the evidence we have suggests otherwise.  That doesn't mean I don't think there are immaterial things (for example, energy is immaterial, although not in thesense that you mean), I just don't hold that the entire universe is contained within a mind - because what contains the mind?  Our minds are contained inside our brains, and there is no evidence whatsoever that a mind can exist outside of a physical structure.  I know you hold otherwise, but you've argued yourself into a corner that you simply can't get out of, because by ruling out the probability that material objects actually do exist without a mind, you've also ruled out any possibility of finding evidence that might support your position.

You are free to believe that there is an external world independent of all minds. The trouble is, you can't find any evidence that can conclusively prove this.

At least I know for a fact that things are only known through minds. I just don't go the extra step into an unproven assumption that things exist independently of minds. Occam's razor, remember?

My view is still more empirical.
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #519 on: March 11, 2014, 12:45:13 AM »
Religion fills a vacuum. The vacuum has to be filled. Even when people reject Christianity, they tend to pick up New Age shit, or start believing in Scientology or Eck.
Right, and the same goes for other religions as well.  I think it's ultimately based in the human desire to understand things, or at least to believe that one understands things.
And what is that human desire.
If I have that desire to be a Physicist or a Microbiologist is that a good desire and if I have that desire to know God is that a bad desire.
What is desire. Can I use it to find the Higgs Boson God particle or God itself?
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline skeptic54768

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2665
  • Darwins +52/-438
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #520 on: March 11, 2014, 12:45:39 AM »
^Even though, logically, if things can only exist within a mind, even other minds, then a deity's mind must exist inside of something else.

I think skeptic knows this.  He just doesn't want to deal with it, thus why he arbitrarily assumes that his god is exempt from the logic he so painstakingly drew up.  A textbook case of special pleadingWiki.

God is infinite and eternal. You can't have an infinite regress of things being minds-inside-minds because then you would have no beginning. So logic dictates there was a beginning, and it was the eternal God, and there we are.
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline Foxy Freedom

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1449
  • Darwins +99/-12
  • Why is it so difficult to say you don't know?
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #521 on: March 11, 2014, 12:45:57 AM »
As I mentioned in 504 good ideas will become mainstream. People who have genuine qualifications have the skills to work these things out, not the casual reader. That is why majority expert opinion is important.

This would be true....unless they have a huge interest in defending their presupposition of Old Earth at any cost. Then, they would just ignore it.

The age of the earth and moon does not depend on the methods of that article. There are better ways to work it out.

More important is that every scientist wants to prove the others wrong. There is no international plot to make up false science.
Neither Foxy Freedom nor any associates can be reached via WWGHA. Their official antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V