http://www.columbiaspectator.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/02/17/4031d9166ab57

His theory is flawed i think

He said that everything exhists because of some cause either caused by something external or by itself...so he is saying that there is either a creator of god, or that god created himself, if that is the case it cant be based as fact., because science says that energy can not be created nor destroyed...he is saying that basically god created himself, if this is the case then he has turned his back on science and the very basic facts of mathematics.

So if he is saying there is a creator of the creator...then he is saying ther eis a creator of the creator of the creator....this is why i find this a bit flimsey.

[This message has been edited by among_the_living (edited 10-19-2005).]

mathematicians are no more an authority on the subject than anyone else.



anyhow, his assumptions:

1) something exhists,

2) everything that exists does so because of some cause,

3) this cause is either external or internal but not both, and

4) everything that exists has a reason for existance

2 is flaky considering what we know of quantum effects.

3 sounds dodgy.

4 is bullshit anyway you look at it.

its not even worth looking at the proof once this has been settled.

even so, he only proves that there is a "unique uncaused phenomenon," which could very well be the big bang for all the information we are given about it (note that big bang is not equal to the universe, so we are safe from his reasoning about the universe not being self creating).

hell, there are so many holes you could go on forever...

if you want proofs, the best i have seen are those by thomas aquinas. they are still flawed, but they would have got you in a pickle if trying to refute them 200 years ago.

Logical "proofs" are always the worst. They generally rely on a jump in logic and/or semantics of words they choose.

His proof is just as crappy as all the rest.

Typical christian "science".

Proof that there is something

we don't understand equals

proof of old jehovah in the sky.

The more humans learn, the less

places god has left to hide.

No, technically he's right. Eventually mathematicians will make the correlation that God is an equation. Essentially an equation has to be balanced, but it's always perfect in doing so. God is a probability equation to be exact. Eventually we'll figure out that god is equal to the universe. We'll also figure out that the universe was never created, it's just a constant balancing within the equation. The equation can't exist without the universe, and since the equation is equal to or rather it is god, god can't exist without the universe and vice versa. The equation is impossibly big because it is the universe. We've learned to use parts of the equation, but our knowledge only reflects a small sliver of it. Some of it is practical knowledge that we'd never suspect. The equation is the most advanced thing that can possibly be conceived, self perpetuation.

The most pivitol moment in history that will define our race will be the moment that we collectively realize that the key to making everything good is balance, balance is heaven.

So, is God perfect? Omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, etc?

quote:Originally posted by Dark_Merchant:

No, technically he's right. Eventually mathematicians will make the correlation that God is an equation. Essentially an equation has to be balanced, but it's always perfect in doing so. God is a probability equation to be exact. Eventually we'll figure out that god is equal to the universe. We'll also figure out that the universe was never created, it's just a constant balancing within the equation. The equation can't exist without the universe, and since the equation is equal to or rather it is god, god can't exist without the universe and vice versa. The equation is impossibly big because it is the universe. We've learned to use parts of the equation, but our knowledge only reflects a small sliver of it. Some of it is practical knowledge that we'd never suspect. The equation is the most advanced thing that can possibly be conceived, self perpetuation.

The most pivitol moment in history that will define our race will be the moment that we collectively realize that the key to making everything good is balance, balance is heaven.

Any publications on this way of thinking?

Taoism anyone? It's all about balance.

quote:Originally posted by Viraljimmy:

The more humans learn, the less

places god has left to hide.

Every consider that perhaps God designed everything this way on purpose?

You look at a blood cell,for instance, and say that's evidence God doesn't exist. I look at a blood cell, the perfect balance of it all, the masterful and rediculously complex way that it works, and ask how can you not see?

quote:Originally posted by The_Rabbi:

Every consider that perhaps God designed everything this way on purpose?

You look at a blood cell,for instance, and say that's evidence God doesn't exist. I look at a blood cell, the perfect balance of it all, the masterful and rediculously complex way that it works, and ask how can you not see?



Complexity = God

is not a sound theory...

Edit: But I'd like to hear the purpose you feel God would design something in this way...



[This message has been edited by Axiom (edited 10-28-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by The_Rabbi:

Every consider that perhaps God designed everything this way on purpose?

You look at a blood cell,for instance, and say that's evidence God doesn't exist. I look at a blood cell, the perfect balance of it all, the masterful and rediculously complex way that it works, and ask how can you not see?

Only complex to the fart minded.

quote:Originally posted by The_Rabbi:

You look at a blood cell,for instance, and say that's evidence God doesn't exist. I look at a blood cell, the perfect balance of it all, the masterful and rediculously complex way that it works, and ask how can you not see?

Argument from incredulity isn't that sound...

quote:Originally posted by Axiom:



Complexity = God

is not a sound theory...

Edit: But I'd like to hear the purpose you feel God would design something in this way...





God isn't complex. Sorry, it's very much simple. It's we who try to make him complex, because with our ability to reason, comes doubt and unbelief, and questions. But with God, he knows, there is no question, God is so simple, a child can understand him. So simple, that we can't. The bible is SO simple, that we can't understand it. If you read the bible, you'd be like, "Huh, I don't get it, Why?" If a child hears the bible, they take it as truth, no questions asked.

Before I was filled with the Holy Ghost, I'd hear and read the bible and still have so many questions, and just not grasp it, after I was filled with the Holy Ghost, almost 11 months ago, I would read the bible and be like, "Wow! This is Good".

It's our own ability to reason that keeps us from understanding, and our own ability to reason that allows us to discern right from wrong. Then, it has to do with what and how we believe, that influences our discernment, which, in turn, goes back to how we reason.

quote:Originally posted by The_Rabbi:

Every consider that perhaps God designed everything this way on purpose?

You look at a blood cell,for instance, and say that's evidence God doesn't exist. I look at a blood cell, the perfect balance of it all, the masterful and rediculously complex way that it works, and ask how can you not see?

Ever wonder why everything seem so coicidental? They say the chances of everything on Earth being created this way is so small (1 in a 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 maybe), that it must have been the works of God.

Considering that the Universe is infinite, is 1 in a 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 such a small probability after all?

quote:Originally posted by The_Rabbi:

Every consider that perhaps God designed everything this way on purpose?

You look at a blood cell,for instance, and say that's evidence God doesn't exist. I look at a blood cell, the perfect balance of it all, the masterful and rediculously complex way that it works, and ask how can you not see?

I then see the eye (one example among countless others) and notice that we have a blind spot that could have been easily fixed and note that either there was no designer/creator, or he was a completely and utter fucking moron.

quote:Originally posted by quasicurus:

Ever wonder why everything seem so coicidental? They say the chances of everything on Earth being created this way is so small (1 in a 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 maybe), that it must have been the works of God.

Considering that the Universe is infinite, is 1 in a 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 such a small probability after all?

Actually, the Universe is 10^40m across (if I remember correctly) according to my physics tutor (and he's had the front page of nature and HIS tutor was employed by Einstein, so I tend to trust him ). This was discovered using the hubble deep-field, which basically means they took pictures of a really really small part of space that seemed to be empty, and saw that they could still see stuff, namely the proto-universes from close to the beginning of time - so the light must've been travelling since the big bang, and therefore this is almost as far out as stuff has got, because the universe is expanding at the speed of light so the light travelling from these objects has had a lot of catching up to do. I'm not sure how we worked out how far away these things are, cosmological red shift or something like that probably - or just how small they are on the picture compared to how small they should be in real life. *shrug*

[This message has been edited by sp0rkius (edited 10-30-2005).]

If god is so smart then what's with the Platypus?

quote:Originally posted by quasicurus:

Ever wonder why everything seem so coicidental? They say the chances of everything on Earth being created this way is so small (1 in a 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 maybe), that it must have been the works of God.

Considering that the Universe is infinite, is 1 in a 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 such a small probability after all?

Another problem is that religious people seem to read the Universe as having a purpose that culminated in us; they've got the anthropic principle ass-backwards.

The premise of this argument is that everything must have a cause. When you assume that the original cause for the universe was a god the question is raised: what caused god? To assume that god was always there or that he is causeless throws out the entire premise of the argument. The argument is circular. Even if the existence of god was to be generously granted on the basis of this argument, one still does not know what sort of god it is that exists! It could be the Muslim God, the Christian God, or anything that one makes up on the spot; an infinite range of gods are all given equal validity by this argument.

mathamatical theories are just that, theories. there is no actual proof other than the equation. until you have some physical qualitative or quantitative proof (subatomic particles smashing into each other in an accelerator for example. there are many theoretical particles, but we can only know they exist if we can detect them with instruments) it's just a physics theory, not fact.

quote:Originally posted by kenwih:

mathamatical theories are just that, theories. there is no actual proof other than the equation. until you have some physical qualitative or quantitative proof (subatomic particles smashing into each other in an accelerator for example. there are many theoretical particles, but we can only know they exist if we can detect them with instruments) it's just a physics theory, not fact.

Stop misusing the word "theory."

quote:Originally posted by literary syphilis:

Stop misusing the word "theory."

yes, i know a scientific theory is as close as science gets to a fact(i.e. the theory of gravitation), but i was speaking so everybody could understand simply what i was talking about. i assumed anybody in the know, as you are, would understand that i was talking down to those that slept through science classs...

now that i bothered to read the article, it's bullshit. what caused god? there is no inconsistency in an infinite univerise. the problem is thinking of infinity as a really long finite number. finite numbers need beginnings. infinity, on the other hand, does not.

quote:

mathamatical theories are just that, theories.

:lol: pseudoscience sinks to a new low...