7
   

Big Bang or a Stretch of God's Imagination?

 
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Nov, 2011 02:36 pm
@georgeob1,
Probably the most fundamental difference is our refusal to treat this clown as Jesus, which is who he claims to be. You really are way out in left field a good deal these days, O'George.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Nov, 2011 02:55 pm
@voiceindarkness,
voiceindarkness wrote:
Imagine, if you will, an infinite moment of creation.

That's where I stopped paying attention, because an "ininite moment" is a contradiction in terms, and yet you saw no need to resolve it. This tells me that you are trying to fool people, possibly including yourself, into thinking you're being profound. But you're not. You're just talking nonsense, and don't notice it because you're using big words as you're talking it.
voiceindarkness
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Nov, 2011 08:33 pm
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:

voiceindarkness wrote:
Imagine, if you will, an infinite moment of creation.

That's where I stopped paying attention, because an "ininite moment" is a contradiction in terms, and yet you saw no need to resolve it. This tells me that you are trying to fool people, possibly including yourself, into thinking you're being profound. But you're not. You're just talking nonsense, and don't notice it because you're using big words as you're talking it.
An infinite moment is not a contradiction in terms. The one I was referring to was the very first moment the entire infinite universe came into being. Beyond that, past, present, future, is an infinite state of now. It just is what it is.
0 Replies
 
voiceindarkness
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Nov, 2011 08:37 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

Quote:
you can kiss my ass.
Im goin out on a limb here but I dont think Jesus woulda said that.
Why not?
0 Replies
 
voiceindarkness
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Nov, 2011 08:58 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
The foundation of any dialogue is some point of unity or commonality. Without one you are just shouting at each other.
We have a commonality, we both agree Christian ideology is stupid at best, but science and religion are both ignorant to God and his creation.
0 Replies
 
voiceindarkness
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Nov, 2011 10:56 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

Quote:
Ive dismissed your point . Its not a theory, it has no evidence .
You've dismissed my point? You don't even know what my point is. Tell me, what is my point that you dismiss?

Quote:
I know now that youve stumbled on to somethings you dont feel comfortsble with but have got some "church ;line" that is just a series of rant points.
What church line? What rant points? I am anti church, if you paid any attention at all you would know that.
Quote:
Ive asked you about ID and youve totally dissed that so why should I waste any more time?
How have I totally dissed that? You seem to be ranting. What would you like to discus about ID?
Quote:
Ive tried discussing why you were cut off by DAwkins and youve skirted that,
How short is your memory? I covered that issue. Remember page three? "Dawkins didn't terminate the conversation. As always, I couldn't keep him and one other person focused on my topic. All they wanted to focus on, was my belief in God.
I had to reply to there remarks. The moderator shut down my thread, saying that it was a science forum, not a religious form".
Quote:
Ive talked about just one piece of evidence of the BB and you claim it without doscussing HOW??
Huh? What are you talking about?
Quote:
Your idiocy about light being halted when you view it is equally silly
For that brief moment when viewed, it is frozen in time, like a snapshot.
IO suggest that you and gungasnake should get a room


Quote:
Quote:
This is a summation of your premise.
You are certainly full of wrong information in this thread
How so? Correct me if I"M wrong. Are you not saying there is no intelligent creator behind the creation? And I can't prove there is one?

Quote:
Quote:
Is visualizing a theory, not scientific
A theoory , yes, You have no theory. Its not scientific because your main point of INTELLIGENCE DRIVES CREATION, just sits there like the cartoon of the blackboard showing a huge equation followed by the statement" AND THEN A MIRACLE HAPPENS". SCience doesnt make any claims about this "miracle" and anything that does isnt science .
I never made the claim that INTELLIGENCE DRIVES CREATION. My claim is God is the inspiration that spoke it into being and it created itself for his purpose. At what point in my theory do you see any claim of God being the driving force.

Quote:
HOW do you even provide any evidence other than incredulousness about how you feel the universe and life COULD NOT be created. SO therefore, yours is totally unscientific and Id wish youd stop trying to fool yourself.
Say what? Whose ranting now?

Quote:
SHow me some evidence of ANYTHING about intelligence and you can be the foirst guy from the DIscovery Inwtitute to even come near to a theory. Till then, keep puffing your bong.
I have to admit, it is a challenge trying to find intelligence in the creation, and I'm not talking about the design of it. Where you puffing your bong when you wrote that?


farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2011 04:50 am
@voiceindarkness,
Your key point of all your spiehls is "WHAT IS THE NAME OF THE INTELLIGENCE ?" everything else (except for a few gaffs) is standard cosmology stuff and is unremarkeable.
You, as the proponent of your hypothesis, are responsible to discuss the compelling reasons that we should accept it over anything else.

I havent been convinced from anything youve said so far, why the concept of an intelligence is even important to you . After all, you are trying to appear scientific in your deliberations, NO?.
voiceindarkness
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2011 04:15 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

Quote:
Your key point of all your spiehls is "WHAT IS THE NAME OF THE INTELLIGENCE ?" everything else (except for a few gaffs) is standard cosmology stuff and is unremarkeable.
My key point? Read my original post, is how I envision the first steps of reality coming into being. Starting with the entire universe being very hot, and ending with the formation of the galaxy full of universes we view now. Confused
Quote:
"WHAT IS THE NAME OF THE INTELLIGENCE ?"
If the intelligence must be given a name at this point, let's put it to rest and call it the name coined by the atheistic world view, " Flying Spaghetti Monster". I like it, can we agree on this and leave that discussion in the threads that it belongs in? Rolling Eyes
Quote:
You, as the proponent of your hypothesis, are responsible to discuss the compelling reasons that we should accept it over anything else.
That is the reason I started this thread. This is the point of discussion you are trying so hard to avoid. How can I discuss my reasons, if you refuse to discuss them with me.? Drunk

Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2011 04:14 am
@voiceindarkness,
Galaxy full of universes? You're just diggin' that hole deeper and deeper . . .
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2011 04:38 am
@voiceindarkness,
Quote:
That is the reason I started this thread. This is the point of discussion you are trying so hard to avoid. How can I discuss my reasons, if you refuse to discuss them with me.?
What you originally posted doesnt smack of anything but a rant. Many have told you that science doesnt deal with an intelligence , you seem obsessed with it and I measure that, once you get done trying to presenting your ideas of cosmology, youll move on to other areas like chemical bonding and evolution.

If youve got nothing toadd, then Ill just sit here until you do. I find it fascinating that ,no matter what yoi choose to call it, your key point still remains something that the Discovery Institute would love.
In your opening statement, youve had more question markes to support your ideas. Someone interested in science would attempt to make the arguments clear and compelling. In here we seem to be bathed in one thing and one thing only. I think we get it. Move on with some substance
PS and with your above statement of a "galaxy full of universes", perhaps you should embrace the little drinking emoticon as your avatar.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2011 04:47 am
@voiceindarkness,
Quote:
If the intelligence must be given a name at this point, let's put it to rest and call it the name coined by the atheistic world view, " Flying Spaghetti Monster". I like it, can we agree on this and leave that discussion in the threads that it belongs in?
No matter what you finally decide to call it, the Intelligence seems to surround and lead anything you say about cosmology. Remember that:'{ "The concept of universal Intelligence" violates the centuries old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting supernatural causation}"
That was my paraphrase of a portion of Hon. John E Jones III decision of Dec 2005
voiceindarkness
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2011 03:22 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

Quote:
If the intelligence must be given a name at this point, let's put it to rest and call it the name coined by the atheistic world view, " Flying Spaghetti Monster". I like it, can we agree on this and leave that discussion in the threads that it belongs in?
Quote:
No matter what you finally decide to call it, the Intelligence seems to surround and lead anything you say about cosmology.
Within my mind video, I see the universe coming to be, as the result of three forms of energy coming to be, positive, negative, and neutral, and the rest took care of itself, as I have explained, not surrounded by or led by anything.
That is what I offered to discuss in this thread. IMHO, God did not have to surround or lead anything. he just spoke, and it manifested itself. The energy went forth, with all of the information manifesting from within to create the universe as we see it today.
Quote:
"The concept of universal Intelligence" violates the centuries old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting supernatural causation}"
The consciousness of man is a self evolving universal intelligence, within a physical reality, within which to evolve.
Quote:
That was my paraphrase of a portion of Hon. John E Jones III decision of Dec 2005
As if his opinion matters.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2011 04:23 pm
@voiceindarkness,
Quote:
Within my mind video, I see the universe coming to be, as the result of three forms of energy coming to be, positive, negative,
Thats amazingly vague. CAn you be specific what you even mean by this?

Quote:
God did not have to surround or lead anything. he just spoke, and it manifested itself. The energy went forth, with all of the information manifesting from within to create the universe as we see it today.
Whatever dude. You say tomato, I say bullshit. You see how you stop all serious discussion? Lets go to a cosmology conference and start off with "Then a miracle happens and everything manifest itself"

Quote:
The consciousness of man is a self evolving universal intelligence, within a physical reality, within which to evolve.
I suppose this makes sense to you, but not to me. Need a little help.

Quote:
As if his opinion matters
It does if you wanna call something science and teach it in public schools in Fed District 3
voiceindarkness
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2011 05:24 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
farmerman wrote:

Quote:
Within my mind video, I see the universe coming to be, as the result of three forms of energy coming to be, positive, negative,
Thats amazingly vague. CAn you be specific what you even mean by this?
I already have, in my opening post. If you can open your little mind, read my theory, and make an effort to visualize what I am saying, then maybe we can discuss it.

Quote:
Quote:
God did not have to surround or lead anything. he just spoke, and it manifested itself. The energy went forth, with all of the information manifesting from within to create the universe as we see it today.
Whatever dude. You say tomato, I say bullshit. You see how you stop all serious discussion? Lets go to a cosmology conference and start off with "Then a miracle happens and everything manifest itself"
If you want to call the universe evolving into being over billions of years, beginning with pure energy, separating into positive, negative, and neutral energy, a miracle, that's great. It seems like a miracle to me.
Doesn't science even teach, that all of the information necessary to create the universe was present in the big bang?

Quote:
Quote:
The consciousness of man is a self evolving universal intelligence, within a physical reality, within which to evolve.
I suppose this makes sense to you, but not to me. Need a little help.
The consciousness of man has self evolved into what it is today. It is a universal intelligence, within a physical reality, in which it evolved.

Quote:
Quote:
As if his opinion matters
It does if you wanna call something science and teach it in public schools in Fed District 3
I don't want to, so his opinion doesn't matter to me.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2011 06:35 pm
@voiceindarkness,
Quote:
The consciousness of man has self evolved into what it is today. It is a universal intelligence, within a physical reality, in which it evolved.
Now theres some masturbatory bullshit of Ive ever heard any. You seem to favor stringing phrases together and then throwing em onto the wall to see if anyone is impressed. Hint: You may be easily impressed, I am not.

stoner sez
Quote:
As if his opinion matters

to which I responded
Quote:
It does if you wanna call something science and teach it in public schools in Fed District 3

to which stoner shows his ignorance by saying
Quote:

don't want to, so his opinion doesn't matter to me.



Im aware , stoner, that there is only a small area of interest that your simple mind is able to process. However, youre not the one keeping track of your idiotic phrases and "Theories"

If youre just going to keep telling me to read your first post(And forget that Ive stated ample number of times that I have, Ive read it, I understand the fractured phrases, but I find it vapid and dimwitted). I asked several times for some substance, detail, and all you do is to keep telling me to "Read my theory". Youve been told many times by others that your communication skills are lacking so rereading your "Theory isnt gonna help cause what you say is just babbling. You seem to labor under the misapprehension that your being profound like Copernicus. Instead your just coming across like Professor Irwin Corey.

Its not saying that youre not entertaining, you are. But not for the reasons that you feel you demonstrate.

I take it your day job isnt remotely associated with science or any field that embraces fact and research.

voiceindarkness
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Nov, 2011 02:33 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
farmerman wrote:

Quote:
The consciousness of man has self evolved into what it is today. It is a universal intelligence, within a physical reality, in which it evolved.
Now theres some masturbatory bullshit of Ive ever heard any. You seem to favor stringing phrases together and then throwing em onto the wall to see if anyone is impressed. Hint: You may be easily impressed, I am not.
Can you be more specific? What is it about my statement that is bullshit?
I'm not trying to impress anyone, are you? Just trying to have an adult conversation with a child. What are you so upset about.

Quote:
stoner sez
Quote:
As if his opinion matters

to which I responded
Quote:
It does if you wanna call something science and teach it in public schools in Fed District 3

to which stoner shows his ignorance by saying
Quote:

don't want to, so his opinion doesn't matter to me.
What's your point? He's just another nut in the jar.

Quote:
Im aware , stoner, that there is only a small area of interest that your simple mind is able to process. However, youre not the one keeping track of your idiotic phrases and "Theories"
Right back at you. My area of interest is truth and righteousness. Can you show me truth, and righteousness in the world? Who is representing Truth in Righteousness? It's not processed by the mind, it comes from the heart.

Quote:
If youre just going to keep telling me to read your first post(And forget that Ive stated ample number of times that I have, Ive read it, I understand the fractured phrases, but I find it vapid and dimwitted). I asked several times for some substance, detail, and all you do is to keep telling me to "Read my theory".
The substance and detail is in my theory, the points of which you are unwilling to discuss. It seems apparent, that you read it with your eyes closed, along with your mind.


Quote:
Youve been told many times by others that your communication skills are lacking so rereading your "Theory isnt gonna help cause what you say is just babbling.
Who's babbling?
Quote:
You seem to labor under the misapprehension that your being profound like Copernicus. Instead your just coming across like Professor Irwin Corey.
Thanks for the complement, I can relate to his lighthearted view of the stupidity of the world.
"If we don't change direction soon, we'll end up where we're going".
Irwin Corey
So true, but we will end up there anyway.
Quote:
Its not saying that youre not entertaining, you are. But not for the reasons that you feel you demonstrate.
Not trying to entertain, entertaining a thought, no one else has yet thought of.
Quote:
I take it your day job isnt remotely associated with science or any field that embraces fact and research.
I embrace truth and righteousness.

The closer you look, the less you see.
(David Copperfield during an interview on The Colbert Report, Sept., 2011.)
You can't see the big picture, by studying the individual puzzle pieces in the box, no matter how close you look. You can even assemble some of the pieces you choose to focus on, science, religion, politics, philosophy, history, personal beliefs, whatever, You still find yourself in a box, within boxes of boxes. You must climb out of the box, to see the big picture and how all of the pieces fit into it.
The same way, you can't see the forest for he trees.

farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Nov, 2011 03:50 pm
@voiceindarkness,
Quote:
Can you be more specific? What is it about my statement that is bullshit?

THIS PART IS THE BULLSHIT
Quote:

The consciousness of man has self evolved into what it is today. It is a universal intelligence, within a physical reality, in which it evolved


Ill leave you to your mission as you see it. Im getting a bit bored
voiceindarkness
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Nov, 2011 09:36 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

Galaxy full of universes? You're just diggin' that hole deeper and deeper . . .
Funny, you know what I meant Rolling Eyes
voiceindarkness
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Nov, 2011 10:22 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
farmerman wrote:

Quote:
Can you be more specific? What is it about my statement that is bullshit?

THIS PART IS THE BULLSHIT
Quote:

The consciousness of man has self evolved into what it is today. It is a universal intelligence, within a physical reality, in which it evolved
A mind of minds, interacting with one another, evolving through knowledge, to where we are now, within this present reality.

Quote:
Ill leave you to your mission as you see it. Im getting a bit bored
My mission? I don't have any mission. I have purpose.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Nov, 2011 04:46 am
@voiceindarkness,
Quote:
evolving through knowledge

The problem with your debate skills is that you like to rely mostly on meaningless but pompous sounding phrases.
 

Related Topics

If the Universe has no beginning? - Discussion by edgarblythe
Bad News for "Big Bang(TM)" - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did all the antimatter go? - Discussion by CAfrica141
New TV series: Young Sheldon - Discussion by edgarblythe
God's Critical Mass - Question by dalehileman
The New State Religion: Atheism - Question by Expert2
Are evolution and the big bang true? - Discussion by Johnjohnjohn
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/19/2022 at 01:44:16