Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Do you see any difference between 4500 years...and 12,500 years?
The Shumerian God Anu dates back to 4500 BC as a minimum (that is 6600 years up to now) and the legend is that Anu is a grand-ancestor of the Visitor - the sky God the legend about whom goes back most probably to 10th millennium BC ... that has never been proved, actually.

Then you should have used the dates you know...rather than the ones you made up...

...right?

1 Reply

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

FBM wrote:
Each misconception or other error is linked to a correction.
Obviously the idea of all these references and quotes is to prove that you are a mega-genius of seventh star magnitude ... and in the capacity of being so can you formulate your personal assumptions of the Big Bang 'theory', without any references to any texts, of any kind, whatsoever?

It is precisely because I acknowledge that others know much more about it that I bring their superior knowledge to bear. That's what you do in academia, son. You cite relevant sources of data. Rolling Eyes

Quote:

FBM wrote:
Only some use the term to deny the existence of something for which there is no evidence
We are not talking about evidence yet.

Well, you certainly aren't. Laughing

Which is strange. You're out here stumping for your god, but refuse to discuss it. I wonder why that is?

Quote:

Just answer the question: is the denial of theism and God and ID of any form a precondition to become a member of the Club ... of the atheists?

I answered it. If your denialism makes you unable to see what's in front of your eyes, that's your weakness. Denying what's in front of you seems to be part and parcel of your approach. Good luck with that one. Wink

What exactly do you or any expert you can cite actually know about your god? Anything? Anything at all?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Then you should have used the dates you know...rather than the ones you made up...right?

F., so and so you don't believe in God - what is the difference whether He is from 6600 or 12500 as a legend on the Earth? When and if the Big Bang succeeds to make at least a millennium as a theory explaining the world we (or sooner our grand-grand-successors) may have a base for conversation?

1 Reply

Quote:

Gaps are shrinking
A god of the gaps argument is an argument from ignorance: it boils down to "We do not know how X happened, therefore X was caused by a god." However, ignorance is never an argument for something. It merely means we do not (yet) know the cause of the phenomenon.

To see why this argument is a fallacy, we can consider similar arguments could have been made at different points in human history:

2000 years ago: "We do not know what causes lightning, therefore it must be a god throwing lightning bolts from the sky."
1000 years ago: "We do not know what keeps the planets in their courses. There must be angels pushing them along."
500 years ago: "We do not know what causes diseases, therefore they must be punishments from God."
200 years ago: "We do not know how the many species of plants and animals could have appeared, therefore God must have created them."
100 years ago: "We do not know how the universe started, therefore God must have done it."
60 years ago: "We do not know how genes are passed from parent to child, therefore traits must be imprinted upon the soul."

As new explanations emerge, the gaps in our knowledge shrink, leaving less and less room in which to fit a god. Since human knowledge keeps growing all the time, it does not seem like a safe bet to assume that any given gap will remain one for very long.

http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=God_of_the_gaps

0 Replies

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

It is precisely because I acknowledge that others know much more about it that I bring their superior knowledge to bear.

There is no way for you to know what the others know, and besides I am not asking about the theory itself, but about the assumptions - what are your personal assumptions to the theory of the Big Bang: Do you believe in Hyperspace (4-D or 11-D)? Whether the Universe has been created or has always existed - in case the Universe has always existed your favorite 'theory' becomes more than ridiculous, don't you think? What about the origin of the Dark Matter (gravitational deformations without any visible ordinary matter in the vicinity)? What about the Dark Energy ... where it is coming from and how it appears here - Do you believe in the law of conservation of energy, or not?

FBM wrote:

That's what you do in academia, son. You cite relevant sources of data.

Unless they are from the Dark Ages of science - the time before the Digital Age, when some of the discoveries have never seen the light of day and some other, have been over-exposed, like for example the General Relativity Theory which is obvious nonsense (or at least with the terms used there that have never been acknowledged by the community of the physicists). BTW you cannot cite inferences made over the assumptions that you have no idea of ... not to say without having your own assumptions on the problem. What are your assumptions of the Big Bang towards time-zero and ground-zero (if have existed)?

FBM wrote:

You're out here stumping for your god, but refuse to discuss it. I wonder why that is?

IMV this assumption with 'My God' is actually yours ... your personal misunderstanding of the issues, set forth for discussion here: Which is more probable - for an ID (it is not necessarily God) to have created the world as we know it today, or for a Chaos (call it Big Bang or as you wish) hiding behind some red shift without any correlation to space, to have 'created' on auto-pilot, navigated by pure stochastics, the things as they are presented by the strange science of Cosmology to have happened and be today?

FBM wrote:

I answered it.

No, you are avoiding the question by answering something which is either some not entirely relevant quote or something that is even worse and is driving the attention away from the real issue, which is who is greater negative thinker. So, can you answer the question: Is the denial of God a mandatory precondition to submit yourself for an atheist?

2 Replies

@Herald,

Quote:

There is no way for you to know what the others know...

a) I know what they publish.
b) I don't have any "personal assumptions" about the BB.
c) Do I believe in blah, blah, blah. No, I understand them as formulated. No belief required.
d) If you're not proposing that a god is the ultimate explanation, what are you proposing?
e) Your gaps are getting smaller and smaller.

What do you know about your god? How do you know it?

1 Reply

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Then you should have used the dates you know...rather than the ones you made up...right?
F., so and so you don't believe in God - what is the difference whether He is from 6600 or 12500 as a legend on the Earth? When and if the Big Bang succeeds to make at least a millennium as a theory explaining the world we (or sooner our grand-grand-successors) may have a base for conversation?

You wrote 12,500 years. I called the dating to your attention.

Now you seem to be in a snit.

Be a adult...and just acknowledge that using the 12,500 years was not appropriate.

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

I don't have any "personal assumptions" about the BB.

This is obvious.

FBM wrote:

Do I believe in blah, blah, blah. No, I understand them as formulated. No belief required.

Without the assumptions in place you cannot understand anything. This is as if to understand a text without knowing the alphabet.

FBM wrote:

If you're not proposing that a god is the ultimate explanation, what are you proposing?

I can propose what I see - so far I don't see any Big Bang on the 'event horizon' creating anything. BTW where is your proof or evidence that a higher-D space can be created out of lower-D space as a result of explosion or whatsoever it might be there?

FBM wrote:

Your gaps are getting smaller and smaller.

Your correlation gap between the red shift and the 'expansion' of space cannot get 'smaller and smaller' as you never have had any of the kind.

FBM wrote:

What do you know about your god? How do you know it?

... and why are you looking for God by the radio telescope ... and if you see on the telescope a transponder streaming from some of our TV satellites how will you recognize at all it as a carrier of communication and information ... if it is encoded by some unknown code, for example?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

You wrote 12,500 years. I called the dating to your attention. Be a adult...and just acknowledge that using the 12,500 years was not appropriate.

Appropriate for what, F. - obviously it is not entirely inappropriate to draw the attention of somebody at the fact that the theory of God has withstand the tests of time and in any case it is much older than the 'theory' of the Big Bang, for example ... besides that you haven't any single piece of verifiable evidence that a cult towards some God has not existed 12 millenniums ago ... not to speak that you have no idea how to prove such a denial?

1 Reply

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
You wrote 12,500 years. I called the dating to your attention. Be a adult...and just acknowledge that using the 12,500 years was not appropriate.
Appropriate for what, F. - obviously it is not entirely inappropriate to draw the attention of somebody at the fact that the theory of God has withstand the tests of time and in any case it is much older than the 'theory' of the Big Bang, for example ... besides that you haven't any single piece of verifiable evidence that a cult towards some God has not existed 12 millenniums ago ... not to speak that you have no idea how to prove such a denial?

Well...my guess about you is that you are not man enough to acknowledge when you are wrong...and will try to weasel out of situations like this rather than acknowledge that you cannot know that it all started 12,500 years ago.

Thank you for showing that I am most likely correct.

1 Reply

@Herald,

Speaking of not answering. It seems you have decided to ignore your failure to answer the question I asked several times.
http://able2know.org/topic/226001-198#post-5837153

1 Reply

@parados,

I can answer you without any problems when you tell us how much is the total energy of the Universe right now: ΣEi = Kinetic + Potential + Mechanical Waves + Chemical + Magnetic + Radiant + Nuclear + Graviational + Thermal, and how all that energy has been accumulated into a zero-D point with 'infinite temperature' - where exactly? ... and what has been the carrier of that 'infinite temperature'? - can you explain that ... and the other mind-blowing claims of your favorite 'theory' onto the time of creation?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Ad hominem, anyone?

0 Replies

@Herald,

You claimed it violated one of the 3 laws of thermodynamics. Now you tell us you can't tell us which one it violates until you get numbers. On what basis did you make your claim since you can't do the calculations you claimed you did to show it violated one of the laws. In other words your original statement was crap you made up and can't back up. Glad to know that.

We'll ignore that your question is not involved with any of the 3 laws and that isn't needed to prove one of them is violated.

2 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

On what basis did you make your claim since you can't do the calculations you claimed you did to show it violated one of the laws.

On the grounds that you don't even have the slightest idea of how these calculation would like.

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

We'll ignore that your question is not involved with any of the 3 laws and that isn't needed to prove one of them is violated.

If you don't remember the laws of thermodynamics the most logical thing is to ignore them.

1 Reply

@Herald,

You said the red shift violated one of those laws. I am still waiting for you to tell us which one of the 3 you think is violated. Your refusal to answer speaks volumes.

0 Replies

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

FBM wrote:
If you're not proposing that a god is the ultimate explanation, what are you proposing?
I can propose what I see -

Holy ****!! Jeebus titty-******* christ!!

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/haironfire_1.gif

You can see your god??? Why didn't you say so earlier?? We could've avoided 99% of this discussion! Can I see it, too?? Is it visible to anyone? Do we need special equipment?? Please let me know ASAP, as I'm eager to get to work on this. I've never seen a god before. Wow! This is going to be so cool!!!

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/bow.gif

Edit: Wait. After I see this god, am I going to start denying medical treatments to my kids in favor of prayer, even after some of them die?

2 Replies

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

I can propose what I see

... and what do you see - red shift without any correlation to space change. WFM. What you think that you are seeing is not less imaginary than any God theory.

1 Reply

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

FBM wrote:
I can propose what I see
... and what do you see - red shift without any correlation to space change. WFM. What you think that you are seeing is not less imaginary than any God theory.

You might want to check that again. I was quoting you. Laughing

Does this mean that you're not going to show me how to see your god?

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/blue.gif

1 Reply

Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know