End of the Universe Part Two

If god does not rule over our world now aren't prayers and his rules irrelevant?

Don't get too angry over the woman comment. I was sliding through the history of man and what the definition of evil is or was and has been. In reality I LOVE women. They can't help being evil. ;) See your icon proves it, a burning demon!!! Are you projecting Satan?

If god had a plan for Satan then I think Satan has already won. As supreme ruler he can make Satan disappear into the void created by the faster than light experiment.

The idea of god doesn't bother me. The idea that man creates a rule set that is absolute does. In choosing man to propagate his true word, god makes the ultimate mistake, and thus seems not only fallible but grossly negligent. ;)

Quote:

---

Do you not acknowledge spritis then, the occult or hauntings?

---

Moira,
As a general rule, no. Just keep in mind, I'm a bit of a doubting thomas.
I do believe there is a negative force in the galaxy but, not the "evil" kind you're thinking of. Generally speaking, I'm talking about matter/energy and such. However, I don't think there are little satanic quarks running around the universe turning protons into sinners. :lildevil:

I'm not angry over the woman comment :) And sure, there's a point in supplication and prayers. When we reach Armageddon, we want to be the chosen ones to live on a paradise earth when God ejects Satan. Satan may have won a temporary battle but not the war.

Quote:

---

When we reach Armageddon, we want to be the chosen ones to live on a paradise earth when God ejects Satan. Satan may have won a temporary battle but not the war.

---

Rhetorical comments, not looking for answers or rationality.

Why does Armageddon have to be in the future? Why wait? The end of the world is convenient. And since there is a paradise existing somewhere in another dimension, Armageddon is the end of Earth not the Universe.

We live our lives to please god. Because apparently he's bored. Are we his children or his toys? For instance the word Muslim means submit, or more accurately complete submission. A term often misused by us in the the west. Why must we submit to a being so powerful we can't even fathom his extent? We are already bugs or even amoebas to him capable only of what he hands us.

With the blink of an eye, the closest rationalization I can conjure based on my created existence handed down by the supreme and infallible, with the blink of an eye god can eject Satan.

I think if there is a god, man has his entire interpretation of him WRONG. And applying junk science to it in the hope of some proof into his or her existence is also inadequate. Maybe god is something we have missed. Like the entire consciousness of all beings. We tend to apply compassionate rules to only humans.

God can appear to be childish, sadistic & quite often belligerent if we were to assume God possesses three distinct traits -omniscience, omnipotence & omnipresence. Those traits coupled with the actions of God from the OT almost makes me wonder who was worse, God or Satan? (strictly from the OT biblical perspective)
These debates always wind up turning into analytical english debates though. Where every sentence begins with "well define (word)...." Good, evil & perfect are three of the toughest words to assign any kind of absolute value to - simply because they don't hold any absolute value (IMO).
The point of me saying all this is because, if we bicker over our own language and its structure, - how the hell will we ever trully define a "God" that we all agree on, let alone have any chance of discovering it's existence.

definition of god: something that is.

Is: something derived from thought

Thought: something that is.

;)

Sure Armageddon is the end of the earth not the universe.

One interesting fact - science agrees that for something to be considered as fact, it has to have a chance factor of less than 10^50. Scientists themselves have said that for all the factors to come together to create the world as we know it, the odds are something like 10^113 - way above what they consider could have happened randomly.

Quote:

---

science agrees that for something to be considered as fact, it has to have a chance factor of less than 10^50.

---

Where does that come from?

I read it in a book on creation vs evolution. It was criticising Prof Darwin's theories. However, the prinicple is simple. If you came across a pile of 10p pieces on the ground, neatly stacked up, would you think they'd got there by chance? Hardly! And that's just a simple example, it's nothing compared to the order and complexity of the universe!

Moira,

What you are referring to is often called "The Ultimate Boeing 747" argument. The argument compares the probability of life originating on Earth to the probability of a hurricane sweeping through a scrapyard and, by doing so, assembling a completely functioning Boeing 747. It's a nice analogy, but it only shows one thing: that you do not understand even the most basic principles of evolution.

"It could not have come about by chance, thus there must be a creator" is not only the wrong argument (as the Darwinian explanation is the exact opposite of chance; by referring to chance, you're only attacking what you wrongfully think is Darwinian evolution, not real Darwinisn), it is also logically flawed (it's of the order of the "If it rains, the streets get wet. The streets are wet, thus it rained" argument).

You are quick to bash people for "invading your religious domain" or "making fun of it", yet you have no problem with stepping on the scientific territory while ignoring even basic principles? I'm not a scientist, and even I feel insulted by your babbling...

Moira,
You might want to check into quantum mechanics & chaos physics. These guys are researching some wild stuff. The reason I mention it is simple - if you think you might have a grasp on the universe and how it came to be, read some of this stuff and you should feel about as smart as a doorknob after you're done (at least I did anyways). :eek:
In any event, check these sciences out if you get a chance. It may just open your eyes up to some revolutionary theories/ideas about our universe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moira

Sure Armageddon is the end of the earth not the universe.

One interesting fact - science agrees that for something to be considered as fact, it has to have a chance factor of less than 10^50. Scientists themselves have said that for all the factors to come together to create the world as we know it, the odds are something like 10^113 - way above what they consider could have happened randomly.

---

Well, that makes me think of several possibilities:

1) we got the odds wrong
2) it did happen that way and yes it was unlikely but its a big universe. If it didn't happen we wouldn't be here to wonder about it. Also, its long odds on tossing 100 heads in a row but if you toss enough coins it will happen.
3) perhaps something did speed things along. Not a god(s) but just some random space travelling alien that sneezed while visiting our ball of rock, water and slime.

This isn't my argument, my scientific theory and these are far more learned people in this field than myself that you're quick to dismiss as knowing nothing. FYI experts have been arguing this for years and nobody has disproved creation. For that matter, if life was created by the big bang or whatever, then as a scientific principle it should be reproducable, that's basic for any argument. Yet nobody has ever managed to create life.

And I don't believe I am bashing anyone any more than I'm getting bashed myself, in fact quite the reverse. I'm getting overrun by people having a go at me, without anyone on "my side".

And I'm more than happy to stop specifically discussing religion vs antheism. I don't think we're doing anything useful now anyway, simply going round in circles so it's pointless. Let's move on for goodness sake.

I'm not intending to bash you personally in any way and I know the debate has been going on a long time. My point simply is that just because winning the lottery is a rare event doesn't mean that people who win it are in any special favour of a higher power, just lucky. Yes, its extremely unlikely that life would evolve at all but if it didn't, who would be there to analyse the odds of it happening? Even if you accept that life evolved on earth "too quickly" to be random chance, maybe we just got lucky. There doesn't NEED to be any explanation, the chemicals just happened to be in the right place at the right time.

Quote:

---

without anyone on "my side".

---

As a general rule, I try not to take sides in a debate. A long time ago, in a college far far away - we had an assignment (journalism class) where we had to create a convincing argument for (xxxx), then create an equally convincing counter-argument against (xxxx). The whole exercise was intended to show how personal bias can impair your ability to debate.

In any event, religion & politics debates seem to hit home with everyone. I have been in very few where someone didn't get all fired up. So, here's what I propose - We settle this debate once and for all, the old-school way.
Theists vs. Non-Theists. Parking Lot. 3PM. :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShagDevil

We settle this debate once and for all, the old-school way.
Theists vs. Non-Theists. Parking Lot. 3PM. :eek:

---

Agnostics will referee....:D:drink:

Quote:

---

This isn't my argument, my scientific theory and these are far more learned people in this field than myself that you're quick to dismiss as knowing nothing.

---

Creationism is not a scientific theory, evolution is. The entire creationism argument is based on just that one flawed argument: "it can't be chance, so there must be a creator." It's illogical, as it wrongly assumes that there are only two possibilities. It is unscientific, as natural selection is the real solution - not chance, not a creator. You can believe in a creator all you want, but don't pretend that there is any science behind your belief. If you do, expect to be ridiculed by 99% of the scientific community.

Quote:

---

FYI experts have been arguing this for years and nobody has disproved creation.

---

Another of the "arguments" of creationists... First of all, nobody has ever disproved the existence of the flying spaghetti monster, either. Secondly, I don't think it is up to me to prove to you that god doesn't exist, just like it isn't up to you to prove to me that the flying spaghetti monster doesn't exist, or for you or me to prove that other preposterous creations of the mind do not exist.

Me: "The flying spaghetti monster exists."
You: "No, it doesn't."
Me: "Well, then prove that it doesn't exist."
You: "I can't."
Me: "Then it exists."

That is your argument?

Quote:

---

For that matter, if life was created by the big bang or whatever, then as a scientific principle it should be reproducable, that's basic for any argument. Yet nobody has ever managed to create life.

---

That's the same "argument" again. You cannot prove that it exists, so it doesn't exists? A scientist will embrace that scientific gap and start researching it; you apply some ill logic and call in a supreme being. Just don't be surprised when one day there are no more gaps to be filled, and no more gaps for god to hide in...

Neg I proved that existed when I was 4 years old and I have the picture in Michigan of the wrecked kitchen to prove it.

I Believe in God. I don't have to prove it to anyone because if they don't, that's their choice. However, people without Faith and Belief astonish me. Why go on if all you believe is going to happen when you die is a little party for your still breathing friends and or relatives?

And another thing, this is sort of on topic, but without Spiritual sides, explain Ghosts.

And for people who don't think Ghosts are real, heh, drive yourself to Colorado, find the Stanley Hotel, walk around... That should do it even though paranormal things don't work on Q.

Alternatively, go to Michigan, find Port Huron which is where I was born, find my Mom, and have Her take you to the house SHE grew up in.

God that place makes me cringe thinking about it.

Once you wake up from something touching you that isn't there and your blanket starts slowly being pulled off you until it's down to your feet while you're asleep and you hear footsteps outside the door even though you're alone in the house, and then you hear a baby crying, THEN say they don't exist.

Hell if you really want to be sure make sure it's late at night when no other sounds are happening from outside, grab a tape recorder, and walk around.

Had to bring that up because I've yet to see someone who doesn't believe manage to explain why things like that happen without some type of belief in an afterlife.

By the way I'm NOT talking about the TV show Most Haunted where there is a psychic, I'm talking about a tape recorder where you can listen to it afterwards and learn about EVPs and why I used to have trouble sleeping at night.

I know of one other member here on AO who will say things do go bump in the night butit may be personal stuff so I won't bring that up, but if I ever go visit them I'm not sleeping.

No pun intended Negative -
What you speak of is called "Negative Proof" or "Proof of Impossibility".

Quote:

---

The negative proof fallacy often occurs in the debate of the existence of supernatural phenomena, in the following form:
* "A supernatural force must exist, because there is no proof that it does not exist".

---

Gore,
I don't need an afterlife to give life meaning. Life, in and of itself, is reason to keep on going.
As for ghosts, I don't deny their existence. They may very well exist. However, I don't find the existence of ghosts as indicative of an afterlife. Who knows what these apparitions may represent, or where they may have come from. It would take alot more than a ghost for me to believe in an afterlife, let alone a creator.

Shag, I know, didn't mean to come off like that, but now I'm thinking of starting a Ghost thread in Cosmos to see what people here really believe when it comes to that.

A few years back we had one because my PFY had video of somethign he caught in a building he worked in and the thread was awesome; people came in and chimed in like a lot, showing their opinions but also giving what could be explanations for what was on the video which I still remember being weird. But it was kind of cool to see the people who work with video for their jobs showing how something like it could happen and even how far off the ground the ball was.

Hmmmm.... *Starting thread with links*.

Sure, winning the lottery is lucky but because there has to be a winner, someone will win it. Likewise, the moon and sun and earth being the right distance apart to produce a total solar eclipse could be put in that category, but imagine if every member in this forum won the lottery! That's what I meant by my scientific odds example. The odds are too great for it to be called chance - you'd suspect a fix, you'd suspect human intervention. And with the creation of the world you're looking at these sort of odds and again, they're impossible to believe without human intervention.

The concept of ghosts and the supernatural is an interesting one. Indeed I know quite a few people who claim to believe in ghosts and the supernatural yet don't believe in God or the Devil! To me, the supernatural is too well documented to be complete rubbish, and I believe the occult is dabbling in evil, dabbling in the dark force that could be called the devil. I'd be too scared to touch tarot cards or ouja boards!

Quote:

---

I Believe in God. I don't have to prove it to anyone because if they don't, that's their choice. However, people without Faith and Belief astonish me. Why go on if all you believe is going to happen when you die is a little party for your still breathing friends and or relatives?

---

The belief that your presence here on earth it the same. That being it is temporary. And just waking up everyday and seeing the sun is reason enough to live. Life itself is worth it, and with that freedom to think as we chose. And when I die they better have a big party to celebrate my LIFE not mourn my DEATH.

Moria I am glad those aren't your theories because they are complete bullshit from my perspective. I am fascinated by religion and world cultures, it's never my intention to derail any one's belief. But junk science in the wrongful application of proving or disproving religion pisses me off. ;) If that application you referenced were true nothing would exist as fact. Even with Darwin, it's a THEORY. One that can be observed in every aspect of life. How's does that factor into 10 to the x power? It doesn't, but it sounds good to the faithful who desire justification for their faith. I admire the modern christian who looks at science and compares their faith. Just be careful of absolutes. I also understand the need for justification in a hostile world who places a religios belife into the realm of the ignorant. As if the existence of the critic is somehow above the need of your own.

The Dali Lama has spent his entire lifetime absorbing science. His book 'The Universe in a Single Atom' is one of the best books I have ever read in my entire life. A day does not go by where I don't think of him and his outlook. He is not Christian, so that may not appeal to those who are. However it is the story of a lifetime of scientific thought applied to a faith that dates back thousands of years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoadClosed

definition of god: something that is.

Is: something derived from thought

Thought: something that is.

;)

---

very damm close RC

nothig is
nothing becomes
nothing is not
...



I'll let you work out the rest of the logic for yourself.

Quote:

---

I Believe in God. I don't have to prove it to anyone because if they don't, that's their choice.

---

You indeed don't have to prove that he exists, just like I hope I don't have to prove to you that the flying spaghetti monster does not exist (actually, it does exist: http://www.venganza.org/ ). To us, there is no difference between believing in god and believing in santa, wodan, thor, allah, or any other product of the imagination of people.

Quote:

---

However, people without Faith and Belief astonish me. Why go on if all you believe is going to happen when you die is a little party for your still breathing friends and or relatives?

---

Here's a nice quote from Jim Watson (from the Human Genome Project). (This is paraphrased from The God Delusion). After his colleague Francis Crick (the other half of the duo that started the science of molecular genetics) resigned his fellowship at Cambridge because the college decided to build a chapel on its property, some people said that they see no conflict between science and religion, because they claim that science is about how things work and religion is about what it is all for. Watson's reply: "Well, I don't think we're for anything. We're just products of evolution. You can say, "Gee, your life must be pretty bleak if you don't think there's a purpose." But I'm anticipating having a good lunch."

moria's religion must be an intersting one, where you get to pick and chose which peices of the holy text are valid (NT, some OT) and toss aside the rest..very conveniant.


moria I sugest you look into the law of very large numbers ...whiel I doubt that the universe is infanate it is very large(if it is infante it then further supports my argument and distroys yours.) so yes the odds of a planet devlopeing life are very small, perhaps even a limit aprochign zero...but the size of the universe is a limt aproching infinate...therefor even if its unlikely to happen, it will happen (see the law of very large numbers.).


as for the assertion that this world is perfect for us....what type of crack are you on??? if the world where perfect for humans then why do we adapt the enviroment to better suit us...we adapted to the world very obviusly (fire, cars, builidings, domesticating animals, buildign tools...ect). look just because you filled the pothole dosn't mean that the pothole was built to hold you.

OK, "perfect" didn't mean absolutely without fault or incapable of improvement. It meant as in Mercury-would-be-too-hot-and-Pluto-would-be too-cold kind of perfect. Our world has many flaws quite apart from environmental, but when all's said and done, it is still a beautiful place. Read some of the astronauts comments ..... they describe earth shining "like a jewel in space" and several who were not previously religiously moved, have come back from these expeditions to the Moon intensely affected by it.

again law of realy big numbers...there are a lot of planets out there....bllions at least, so even if we are lookig at billion to one odds that a plalnet can sustain life....well it has to happen at least once then..


i gather that you are a biblical type creationist...i am guessign that the whole genissis part of the bible is to be taken literaly correct?

to me creationism is a lazy copout..its "i am not bright enough to grasp (eveolution, big bang, whatever) so lets just say magic happend." its realy hard to prove tht magic didn't happen as its magic...on the otehr hand it shold be very easy to honestly disprove biogenissis and eveolution are impossible (they are valid theories after all and can be easily disproved if false)....both have held up to years of scientific rigor, with far stronger evidence then "magic".

I would hope that anyone going to the moon would be intensely affected by it :D

Most scientists who are intensely affected by the earth's beauty aren't religious. If you want some stats: more than 90% of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the US equivalent of being a Fellow of the Royal Society in Britan, are atheists. The figures for the Royal Society are comparable. If you look at Nobel Price winners in the sciences, the figures are even higher.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moira

OK, "perfect" didn't mean absolutely without fault or incapable of improvement. It meant as in Mercury-would-be-too-hot-and-Pluto-would-be too-cold kind of perfect. Our world has many flaws quite apart from environmental, but when all's said and done, it is still a beautiful place. Read some of the astronauts comments ..... they describe earth shining "like a jewel in space" and several who were not previously religiously moved, have come back from these expeditions to the Moon intensely affected by it.

---

Ah, but this is precisely a point raised by the whole evolution/car park puddle analogy. The car park puddle could look at a shot glass and say "too small" and the grand canyon and say "too big" then look at its own little depression and say "this is perfect for me". The car park puddle might very well think that its little depression was made just for it to so perfectly fit its shape when reality is the other way round. The car park puddle fits the depression it is in. Not because either was made for the other, but that water pools in a depression as defined by the laws of gravity and density. The water could change the depression but in doing so the water will change too and both will still be a perfect fit.

The Earth is neither too hot nor too cold because we were born on it and we have adapted to those temperatures. Actually, I would argue that the world is both too hot and too cold as evidenced by the invention of clothes, central heating and air conditioning.

<edit>
I'm not looking to make anyone renounce god here, but I do so love picking on flaws in reasoning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Negative

To us, there is no difference between believing in god and believing in santa, wodan, thor, allah, or any other product of the imagination of people.

---

You mean you don't get presents? Väterchen Frost doesn't visit you ??

Kein klein boot fuer Nikolaus-Stiefel either. Or in your case I think the proper one would be Sinterklaas correct?

Neg I know you're not stupid but a little belief doesn't hurt :)

Quote:

---

Neg I know you're not stupid but a little belief doesn't hurt

---

Actually, I believe it does hurt. I believe religion hurts science (if the evidence doesn't match up with your beliefs, you throw out the evidence rather than your beliefs), I believe it hurts morality (the bible is pathetic as a moral compass), and I believe it hurts humanity as a whole (every single conflict in the world, without exception, has its roots in religious discord). When's the last time you heard about an atheist killing someone for his or her beliefs?

Have you ever considered that the only reason you're a christian is that you were born in the US and not in, say, Pakistan? If you would have been born in Pakistan, you would declare that islam is the only true belief, and that those who do not share your beliefs will eternally burn in hell. You could say: "What if you're wrong, Neg?" - I believe the real question is "What if you're wrong?"

Actually I'm not that way because of where I was born. Believe me, when I was in high school I got called evil almost dailey saying I was going to burn for what I listened to, what I watched on TV and in movies, and because I swear a lot, and just like, everything people would assume I was like bad.

So I used to sit and think, what do I REALLY BELIEVE? And I Believe exactly what I say I Believe.I didn't agree with what people say on TV, I mean obviously, because I've seen TV Pastors saying that drugs are evil, where I Believe what it says in Genisis, which is that all seed bearing plants can be used for food, and Who made those plants.

So really it's not where I was born.

Are you really saying that if you would have been born in Pakistan, you would be a christian? Are you really saying that if you would have no access to a bible and that if your mommy and daddy would tell you from day 1 that islam is the only way to go and that all other religions are evil, you would somehow become a christian? How does that work? Divine intervention?

The "seed bearing plants" example is typical: you use what you like, you dismiss what you dislike. The bible is an excellent book for doing so, as it could be interpreted in any way you want to.

PS: I know that Pakistan has a christian minority. Fact is that it just magically happens to be so that most western countries are overwhelmingly christian (in theory, that is... the US is the only western country where religion is still going strong - all others are mainly secular), and most eastern countries muslim? That most southern countries are catholic? That the more north you go, and the more west (again with the exception of the US), the more secular? That is all coincidence to you, and not because of geography?

As the old saying goes, "It's not what you do, it's the way that you do it". Religion has long been a source of evil in the world (they seem to take turns), but it can also be a fine moral blueprint, in the right hands. I've seen examples of both.

From my perspective it makes only a slight difference which religion you subscribe to.

Well to me since I wasn't in Pakistan (Which if I was, yea I would still be, I'd just have my own little crops ;) ) but anyway, back to what I was saying, I think who you are isn't much on up-bringing as it is personality.

Aardosymon to have adapted in the first place it must have been near enough right. We could never have been born on something totally inhospitable.

And I don't think "just ok" sums up earth either. It's clear we've been given the ability to appreciate the beauty of the earth, which is not a trait needed for survival and plays no part in evolution. When I view the awesome wonders of nature, that alone makes me believe in God. We have more than simply adapted to environmental conditions on the planet.

Quote:

---

I think who you are isn't much on up-bringing as it is personality.

---

That's not at all what you were saying, and it's irrelevant :p

Do you believe that you would be the same person you are now, with the same beliefs, if you would have been born in a fundamentalist muslim family in Pakistan? If your answer is "yes", then you'd be a unique case. If your answer is "no" (and I really hope it is before I start doubting your sense of reality), then there is a tiny problem, no?

Neg, I really don't ever think about it. You weren't born in a Muslim family as far as I know, but you aren't one of those or as it appears anything else when it comes to all of this.

I don't think you've ever said your family has no real beliefs either, but what I mean is, I really don't think what your family taught you has much to do with who you are.

It weighs in on it sure, but I don't think it's everything. I have family without belief in anything, and they talk about it often, but I believe what makes sense to me inside, not what someone told me I should.

If I was born there it's hard to say what decisions I'd have made, I really don't know, or care. It could have been me being born in Michigan and everything that ever happened to me that made me touch a keyboard for the first time, or pick up a bass or grow my hair out.

Isn't that sort of like chaos theory? One thing can change everything?

"The thing that's really going to cook your noodle....."

The scene in the Matrix where Neo meets the Oracle for the first time.

Imagine knowing the outcome of a minor change, would you do it or would you 'time out" worrying about all of the repercussions?

What if God was an Atheist...chicken and the egg who came first, who created God?...