|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
2nd March 2013, 11:02 AM | #5561 |
Hostile Nanobacon
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rachel, KS
Posts: 33,127
|
|
2nd March 2013, 11:26 AM | #5562 |
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator, Russell's Antinomy Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
|
Are you, then, claiming that Barrow and Tipler's special pleading about their concept of quantum vacuua is the reason you believe naturalism to be the best explanation for our existence?
You keep trying to sidestep the inevitable infinite regression. If nothing exists without a cause, then your "uncaused cause*" cannot, by your definition, exist. If anything can exist without a cause, then the idea of 'god' (especially, as has been pointed out, the incompetent, vengeful, deceitful, spoiled child 'god' of the reed-cutters and sheep-herders, perceptible only through the exercise of proper faith**) is a poor substitute for observed reality. The so-called "principle" that "whatever begins to exist has a cause" (any citations for that "principle"?) is simply special pleading at its most blatant; a way to pretend that your 'god' (out of all the 'gods') is somehow different from everything else, without demonstrating it in any way. *("I'm not sayin' it's 'god'...but it's 'god'...) **I"If you believe, you will perceive; if you perceive not, it is your belief, not 'god', that is deficient...") |
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest "The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David "Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze |
|
2nd March 2013, 11:47 AM | #5563 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,626
|
|
2nd March 2013, 11:51 AM | #5564 |
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator, Russell's Antinomy Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
|
|
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest "The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David "Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze |
|
2nd March 2013, 12:05 PM | #5565 |
I say nay!
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Long Island
Posts: 3,892
|
Not that you'll listen.
What he meant was no one knows about the existence of god, Though as far as I'm concerned there's more then enough evidence to render the god hypothesis null and void. As far as science having answers, He is absolutely correct, The advancements science has given us are almost uncountable. There is no hypocrisy in science, It is the tool of which we use to find the answers but we do not have all the answers yet. |
__________________
Memento Mori |
|
2nd March 2013, 12:06 PM | #5566 |
I say nay!
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Long Island
Posts: 3,892
|
|
__________________
Memento Mori |
|
2nd March 2013, 12:14 PM | #5567 |
Schrödinger's cat
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 16,140
|
No he doesn't. The fact that science can't (yet?) answer a particular question doesn't mean that it hasn't successfully answered plenty more, using verifiable evidence to do so.
Science doesn't know everything, it probably never will, but that's not an excuse to wilfully ignore what it does know. |
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett |
|
2nd March 2013, 12:15 PM | #5568 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 5,692
|
What do you mean “KNOW? What sort of silly misguided question is that? We are not talking about anyone “knowing”. We are not talking about certainty. I already explicitly said to you above that those descriptions are the product of various recent models of the BB, as described in the books and papers that I just listed for you! You have “done so” what?? What have you “done so“ ?? Your comment has nothing whatsoever to do with the quote you just highlighted. I think you must imagine you are talking about something else. Quote: , ". . . the modern picture of the quantum vacuum differs radically from the classical and everyday meaning of a vacuum-- nothing. . . . The quantum vacuum (or vacuua, as there can exist many) states . . . are defined simply as local, or global, energy minima (V'(O)= O, V"(O)>O)" ([1986], p. 440). The microstructure of the quantum vacuum is a sea of continually forming and dissolving particles which borrow energy from the vacuum for their brief existence. A quantum vacuum is thus far from nothing, and vacuum fluctuations do not constitute an exception to the principle that whatever begins to exist has a cause. Who said the fluctuations are literally “nothing”? I did not say that. What I just said above (about vaccum fluctuation) is no different from what Tippler and Barrow say in your quote. So what actually is your objection? The problem area in your quote is that Tippler and Barrow, who afaik are well known creationists, jump to an unwarranted conclusion that because vacuum fluctuations probably exist, therefore they conclude that such fluctuations are quote " not an exception to the principle that whatever begins to exist has a cause " ... however their mistake there is that they suddenly assume, without any explanation, that the fluctuations must have a "beginning" ... ... the fluctuation don’t have a "beginning" in any sense of "Time". Instead each fluctuation represents the transient appearance of space-time forming from a timeless vacuum energy. The fluctuations occur because of the Uncertainty Principle. If you have a vacuum energy, then you can't avoid the fluctuations. That's the basis of quantum mechanics. That’s why there is always “something rather than nothing”. |
2nd March 2013, 01:10 PM | #5569 |
Tergiversator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
|
|
__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser |
|
2nd March 2013, 02:37 PM | #5570 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,626
|
|
2nd March 2013, 02:39 PM | #5571 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,626
|
|
2nd March 2013, 02:50 PM | #5572 |
I say nay!
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Long Island
Posts: 3,892
|
|
__________________
Memento Mori |
|
2nd March 2013, 03:47 PM | #5573 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605
|
|
2nd March 2013, 03:47 PM | #5574 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Here Now
Posts: 12,229
|
I do not think Gibhor is capable of grasping what you are saying. And I am not saying he is dumb or something, I really mean I don't think he is getting the picture your painting, because it is just not a concept, graspable to him.
I myself have a bit of a hard time, understanding all the science, but then I have nothing to prove, and I am alright with being wrong about something, or even not knowing something at all. Not knowing, puts me in an "open mind" position, to learn. |
2nd March 2013, 03:53 PM | #5575 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Here Now
Posts: 12,229
|
I eat what I was taught to eat.
I eat what's available. I eat what tastes good to me. No morals involved. |
2nd March 2013, 04:17 PM | #5576 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,626
|
|
2nd March 2013, 04:18 PM | #5577 |
Meandering fecklessly
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,428
|
|
__________________
A government is a body of people usually - notably - ungoverned. -Shepard Book |
|
2nd March 2013, 04:22 PM | #5578 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 23,499
|
|
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive? ...love and buttercakes... |
|
2nd March 2013, 04:25 PM | #5579 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,399
|
|
__________________
"If I actually believed that Jesus was coming to end the world in 2050, I'd be preparing by stocking up on timber and nails" - PZ Myers |
|
2nd March 2013, 04:33 PM | #5580 |
Crazy Little Green Dragon
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: East Coast, US
Posts: 10,678
|
Maybe. Very probably not, though. Regardless, for each bit of energy "created,"* there would be an equal and opposite amount of energy, along the lines, mathemathically, of 1 + -1 = 0.
It's not that pre-existing energy is required, at all, just that reality itself "exists" in the way that it's been observed to do. It's actually a far, far better solution, logically-speaking, than an incredibly complex, intelligent being that created everything. The assumption of the necessity of an intelligent being demands the invocation of infinite regression, to the point that special pleading cannot actually solve the issue. A model like the one presented, on the other hand, which explains complexity as the result of emergent systems, does not tend to demand the invocation of infinite regression, as that concept becomes irrelevant by the nature of the model. At best, it's "possible" that such might be relevant in the specific case, but that we have no good reason to assume that it definitely is relevant. The God hypothesis, on the other hand, unavoidably demands infinite regression, special pleading or not. * - It's distinctly possible that I'm misrepresenting the concepts in question. If anyone feels like correcting me, please, do so. |
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon. |
|
2nd March 2013, 04:37 PM | #5581 |
The Infinitely Prolonged
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Westchester County, NY (when not in space)
Posts: 15,612
|
|
__________________
WARNING: Phrases in this post may sound meaner than they were intended to be. SkeptiCamp NYC: http://www.skepticampnyc.org/ An open conference on science and skepticism, where you could be a presenter! By the way, my first name is NOT Bowerick!!!! |
|
2nd March 2013, 04:47 PM | #5582 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
|
The Reluctant Cannibal
Flanders: A song which we call, "The Reluctant Cannibal": Seated one day at the tom-tom, I heard a welcome shout from the kitchen: "COME AND GEEEEEEEEEEET IT!" Roast leg of insurance salesman! A chorus of "yum"s ran round the table: (Yum yum yum yum yum yum yum...) Except for Junior, who pushed away his shell, Got up from his log, and said: Swann: "I don't want any part of it!" Flanders: What? Why not? Swann: I don't eat people. Flanders: Hey? Swann: I won't eat people. Flanders: Huh? Swann: I don't eat people. Flanders: I must be going deaf! Swann: Eating people is wrong. Flanders: It's wrong? Swann: Don't eat people. Flanders: Have you gone clean out of your mind? Swann: I won't eat people. Flanders: What's the matter with the lad? Swann: Don't eat people. Flanders: He keeps on repeating. Both: Eating people is bad. Flanders: But people have always eaten people, What else is there to eat? If the Juju had meant us not to eat people, He wouldn't have made us of meat! Swann: Don't eat people. Flanders: Oh no, not again. Swann: I won't eat people. Flanders: All the day long. Both: Don't eat people. Flanders: He keeps on repeating. Both: Eating people is wrong. Flanders: Well... I... I never heard a more ridiculous idea in all my born days. To think that a son of mine should grow up to be a sissy - me, chief assistant to the assistant chief! I suppose you realise, son, if this was to get around, we might never get self-Government. Swann: I won't eat people! Flanders: Have you been talking to one of your mothers again? You're not getting to be one of these cranks who think that eating people is cruel, are you? Seeing the man sitting in the pot and you think he's suffering. Oh, it's not like that at all. Why, he's just had an invigourating chase through the forest, sitting there in the nice warm water with all the carrots and dumplings and things, he's thinking, "Oh, the pleasure and happiness I'm going to give to a heap of people". That man in the pot there, he enjoys it! Swann: Eating people is wrong! Flanders: Look son, son, I admire your sincerity. Always be sincere... whether you mean it or not. But you're young, you're young, when you're young you think you can change the whole world overnight, even eating people - I know, I've been young myself. Take it from your old Dad, you've just got to learnt to take the world as it is. Swann: I won't let another man pass my lips! Flanders: I know why you say "Don't eat people", because you are a coward, Francis, that's your trouble. Yes, a yellow-livered coward. You wouldn't mind eating people if you weren't afraid of ending up in the pot yourself - how despicable! If you go on like this you're liable to get ME into hot water. Swann: I won't eat people. Flanders: That's enough! Swann: I don't eat people. Flanders: I don't want to... Swann: Eating people is wrong! Flanders: Communist! Flanders: Going around saying "Don't eat people", That's the way to make people hate'ya. We always have eaten people, always will eat people, You can't change human nature. Flanders: Now let's try... Swann: I won't eat people, I don't eat people, I won't eat people, I don't eat people! Flanders: Must have been someone he ate! Swann: Eating people is out! Flanders: I give up, I give up, you used to be a regular anthrophagi. If this crazy idealistic idea of yours was to catch on, I just dunno where we would all be. Just about ruin our entire internal economy. Fortunately, I suppose it's catching on isn't really very likely - why, you might just as well going around saying "Don't fight people", for example... Swann: Don't fight people? Ha, ha! Don't fight people?! Ha ha ha! Flanders: There, imagine? There, you see! All part of the same... Both: (laughing) ... fantastical impossibility! Flanders: That's the boy! Both: RIDICULOUS! |
2nd March 2013, 04:48 PM | #5583 |
Hostile Nanobacon
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rachel, KS
Posts: 33,127
|
|
2nd March 2013, 04:50 PM | #5584 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
|
|
2nd March 2013, 04:52 PM | #5585 |
Hostile Nanobacon
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rachel, KS
Posts: 33,127
|
|
2nd March 2013, 04:54 PM | #5586 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
|
|
2nd March 2013, 05:03 PM | #5587 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,399
|
After having a kid it probably chilled God out some.
|
__________________
"If I actually believed that Jesus was coming to end the world in 2050, I'd be preparing by stocking up on timber and nails" - PZ Myers |
|
2nd March 2013, 05:04 PM | #5588 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
|
|
2nd March 2013, 05:24 PM | #5589 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Here Now
Posts: 12,229
|
|
2nd March 2013, 05:25 PM | #5590 |
I say nay!
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Long Island
Posts: 3,892
|
|
__________________
Memento Mori |
|
2nd March 2013, 05:33 PM | #5591 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Here Now
Posts: 12,229
|
Yup, there would be a situation where I would eat Gibhor. If my family were going to starve and only Gibhors freshly dead body was available, as a last ditch effort to stay alive, I'd eat him right up.
A little onions, a little garlic......hmmmm....who knows? But, that is an extreme example. |
2nd March 2013, 05:36 PM | #5592 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
|
And of course there was the cannibal who passed his best friend.
|
2nd March 2013, 05:38 PM | #5593 | |||
Dental Floss Tycoon
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,371
|
|
|||
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone. |
||||
2nd March 2013, 05:40 PM | #5594 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 17,646
|
|
2nd March 2013, 06:22 PM | #5595 |
I say nay!
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Long Island
Posts: 3,892
|
|
__________________
Memento Mori |
|
2nd March 2013, 06:29 PM | #5596 |
Dental Floss Tycoon
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,371
|
|
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone. |
|
2nd March 2013, 06:32 PM | #5597 |
Daydreamer
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 8,044
|
Maybe it does. As long as you're not killing people for the purpose of eating them, is there actually anything inherently immoral about eating them? Sure, there's health risks and it would be considered disrespectful. But if the deceased wasn't diseased, and you had permission from their next of kin, would it actually be immoral to eat them? What does your big book of religious values (The Bible) have to say about that? Wait, there's no need for you to answer. I can look it up for myself.
Originally Posted by Leviticus 26:29
Originally Posted by Deuteronomy 28:53
Originally Posted by Deuteronomy 28:57
Originally Posted by Isaiah 9:19-20
Originally Posted by Isaiah 49:26
Originally Posted by Jeremiah 19:9
Originally Posted by Ezekiel 5:10
Originally Posted by Zechariah 11:9
Originally Posted by 2 Kings 6:28-29
Originally Posted by Lamentations 4:10
Originally Posted by Micah 3:2-3
I can't seem to find any injunction against cannibalism in the Bible. In fact, didn't Jesus tell people to symbolically consume his flesh and blood? Are you sure that cannibalism is wrong according to your beliefs? |
__________________
"That is just what you feel, that isn't reality." - hamelekim |
|
2nd March 2013, 06:34 PM | #5598 |
Dental Floss Tycoon
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,371
|
Morality is not involved when a female spider eats a male spider after mating. This behavioral program has evolved because it leads to greater reproductive success for the spiders. The same is true of a spider "sacrificing" herself to her newly hatched young.
It is morally acceptable, to most people, for a human to eat a cow because we place greater value on human life than on other species. Would you please explain what context would make it morally good to kill your own daughter for having sex with her boyfriend? |
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone. |
|
2nd March 2013, 06:35 PM | #5599 |
Dental Floss Tycoon
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,371
|
|
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone. |
|
2nd March 2013, 06:39 PM | #5600 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
|
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|