ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


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.
Reply
Old Today, 10:30 AM   #1121
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 89,708
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
It doesn't matter which god. You are arguing that ALL gods don't exist.
Again, I am asking you why we should consider the god you have been posting about is possible. What reasons do you have for considering the god you have been posting about is possible?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 10:43 AM   #1122
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 22,800
Jabba please explain how the second person who is completely different from you and shares none of your qualities that you are going to be re-incarnated into makes you "immortal." We've asked you several times now... and... wait... where am I?
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 01:08 PM   #1123
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 24,229
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
In spite of the fact that we "know it all", we have very little verifiable information about the universe long ago. We just have a few crude mathematical models competing with each other.

From that POV we can't rule out anything out and that includes deities or other forms of intelligence. If we learn anything more about the origins of the universe then it is likely to be very different to how we perceive it today.

Yes, from a scientific POV, we would have to assume that apples aren't going to suddenly fall upwards as there is no scientific way to deal with that. However, this goes to the current motivations and actions of a deity which is definitely not something that science is equipped to deal with.
You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. First you suggest that we take a scientific view of god and then follow up with science can't deal with a deity. I agree with the latter though.

PS
To begin with, it is my understanding that Maxwell's equations disprove the existence of magnetic monopoles. But I'm not a physicist. Nevertheless, there is a clear definition as to what a magnetic monopole would be if they existed and experiments have been conducted with unsatisfactory results.

The analogy with a super vague deity is poor.

Your argument that an unknown being with unknown properties is possible because, well, it is unknown. God in your limited description is the ultimate tautology. He is that he is.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 01:46 PM   #1124
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 22,800
Don't fall for it. Don't get drug down into letting Psion hand hold us through "Explain everything science can't explain or admit God (Oh I'm so terribly sorry "Maybe God" *Roll Eyes*) for everything I can think of."

God of the Gaps is not valid, and "Possible God of the Gaps" is not some new variation on it.

It doesn't matter of Magnetic Monopoles stay mysteries until the last star burns out, it's not evidence for God.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC

Last edited by JoeMorgue; Today at 01:53 PM.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 07:46 PM   #1125
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 65,439
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
In spite of the fact that we "know it all", we have very little verifiable information about the universe long ago. We just have a few crude mathematical models competing with each other.
This is true, if by "crude" you mean "extremely complex and detailed, and having been tested against reality and found to be accurate to fourteen decimal places".
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 07:53 PM   #1126
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 22,800
I'm disappointed.

I really hope one day I encounter an apologist who, when argued into a corner, doesn't just drop the facade and do the same damn anti-intellectual, "Science doesn't know everything therefore magic" routine.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 08:08 PM   #1127
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 65,439
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
I'm disappointed.

I really hope one day I encounter an apologist who, when argued into a corner, doesn't just drop the facade and do the same damn anti-intellectual, "Science doesn't know everything therefore magic" routine.
You know what else is getting my back up? It's the old "we don't know everything therefore we know practically nothing" routine. People say it about brains, too. We don't know everything about how brains work, therefore we know practically nothing about how brains work. No. That's wrong. We know a lot about how brains work.

We know a lot about the origin of the universe, too. The "gap" that we don't know a lot about is the first picosecond. The first 10-12 second. And we know a reasonable amount about the later part of that picosecond too.

"Very little verifiable information" my foot. We know a lot. And by "we" I mean working cosmologists and particle physicists who devote their lives to studying this field. Claiming that we know practically nothing is an insult to those working scientists.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 08:17 PM   #1128
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 22,800
Because that's where God is dying his last, well deserved breaths; the beginning of the universe and 70 billion different code words for "Soul" that people keep trying to wedge into every unexplained part of human mental functioning.

But as I said earlier I caution against letting the apologist drag us down into a "Now spoon feed me everything science knows to my satisfaction while I fight you every step of the way, shoving God into every gap both real and imagined."

So, any 3rd parties listening, no I will not explain to you how any "Oh... oh so ur saying science can explain (insert thing science can easily explain but you already "If we came from money then why are there still monkeys" level Apologists 101 gotcha ready for...) works?" things work. I can recommend many adequate primary school level books, some with pictures, to explain the things science has discovered.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC

Last edited by JoeMorgue; Today at 08:22 PM.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 08:32 PM   #1129
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 15,630
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Again, I am asking you why we should consider the god you have been posting about is possible. What reasons do you have for considering the god you have been posting about is possible?
I listed two qualities that a universe creator would need and mentioned the Abrahamic God as a possible contender (just to make you happy).

Otherwise, I have not been posting about any specific god. That is entirely your own spin which you did because you can't answer what I posted.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 08:36 PM   #1130
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 65,439
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
I listed two qualities that a universe creator would need and mentioned the Abrahamic God as a possible contender (just to make you happy).

Otherwise, I have not been posting about any specific god. That is entirely your own spin which you did because you can't answer what I posted.
Have you or have you not been arguing that it is impossible to rule out the idea that it is possible that there might be a god or god-like being existing outside of our ability to detect it?

That's the god that Darat is saying that you're posting about. It's not a specific god of any particular religion, but it's the one that you have been arguing is not impossible.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 08:58 PM   #1131
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 15,630
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. First you suggest that we take a scientific view of god and then follow up with science can't deal with a deity. I agree with the latter though.
What is so difficult about "we can't rule out a deity in the origins of the universe (at least)" and "we can't scientifically deal with magic"? I see no contradiction here whatsoever.

Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
To begin with, it is my understanding that Maxwell's equations disprove the existence of magnetic monopoles.
No, Maxwell's equations just don't include monopoles. There is nothing to stop us doing so (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet...39;s_equations).

Paul Dirac did some research in this field in 1931 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet...s_quantization) and found that if monopoles existed then charges would be quantized. Charges are in fact quantized so the mathematics alone don't rule out monopoles.

Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
But I'm not a physicist. Nevertheless, there is a clear definition as to what a magnetic monopole would be if they existed and experiments have been conducted with unsatisfactory results.
Wrong again. Maxwell's Equations only describe the forces associated with charge and magnetism. They don't say anything about the structure of these things nor posit a theory about how they work.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:02 PM   #1132
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 15,630
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Have you or have you not been arguing that it is impossible to rule out the idea that it is possible that there might be a god or god-like being existing outside of our ability to detect it?

That's the god that Darat is saying that you're posting about. It's not a specific god of any particular religion, but it's the one that you have been arguing is not impossible.
I pointed out that if the universe was created by a god then that god must exist independently of the universe. The bible talks about an "invisible" God (contradictions not withstanding) so I don't understand how anybody could accuse me of creating a unique god.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:08 PM   #1133
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 65,439
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
I pointed out that if the universe was created by a god then that god must exist independently of the universe. The bible talks about an "invisible" God (contradictions not withstanding) so I don't understand how anybody could accuse me of creating a unique god.
Okay, but if such a god did exist, how could we tell it exists unless it intervenes in the universe in some detectable way?

And if there is no way we can tell whether it exists or not, why the heck are we even speculating whether it exists? Just accept that for all intents and purposes it doesn't, and move on.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:17 PM   #1134
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 15,630
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
And if there is no way we can tell whether it exists or not, why the heck are we even speculating whether it exists?
Because in spite of your Einsteinic knowledge, we know bugger all about the universe.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:20 PM   #1135
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,637
I will repeat an earlier comment of mine. There is no way that the non-detectable, non-interacting entity that psionl0 is trying to discuss fits any definition of “god” that any human has ever used. The word and concept of “god” is, after all, both invented and defined by humans. All gods that humans have ever invented and defined have been both detectable and interacting. Most religions have things called prayers. The sole purpose of these prayers is to interact with their god.

So carry on discussing this non-detectable, non-interacting entity if you must, but at least invent a new name for it. It is most definitely not a god.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:21 PM   #1136
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,637
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
Because in spite of your Einsteinic knowledge, we know bugger all about the universe.
Speak for yourself. Or is that the royal “we”?
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:22 PM   #1137
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 65,439
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
Because in spite of your Einsteinic knowledge, we know bugger all about the universe.
Again, we know tons about the universe, and you suggesting that we know bugger all is an insult to all the hard working scientists who have dedicated their lives to studying it.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:25 PM   #1138
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 24,229
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
I listed two qualities that a universe creator would need and mentioned the Abrahamic God as a possible contender (just to make you happy).

Otherwise, I have not been posting about any specific god. That is entirely your own spin which you did because you can't answer what I posted.
Sorry, that doesn't define what is a god. I have heard countless Christian, Muslim and Jewish apologists fail miserably in defining what a god is. And FYI, every single member has their own person perspective which may or may not be supported by their respective canons.

Usually I hear some kind of pablum like that God is outside of the universe. Or timeless and undefinable. Both of which are nonsensical properties. It says what God isn't. By not stating a specific god with specific properties you have created an unfalsifiable worthless catchall. You are proposing the textbook definition of the God of the Gaps. Your god lives there.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.

Last edited by acbytesla; Today at 09:35 PM.
acbytesla is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:26 PM   #1139
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 15,630
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
There is no way that the non-detectable, non-interacting entity that psionl0 is trying to discuss fits any definition of “god” that any human has ever used.
It fits the Abrahamic God down to a T ("Happy is he who has not seen ..."). So speak for yourself.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:28 PM   #1140
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 15,630
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Again, we know tons about the universe
No we don't.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:34 PM   #1141
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 24,229
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
What is so difficult about "we can't rule out a deity in the origins of the universe (at least)" and "we can't scientifically deal with magic"? I see no contradiction here whatsoever.


No, Maxwell's equations just don't include monopoles. There is nothing to stop us doing so (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet...39;s_equations).

Paul Dirac did some research in this field in 1931 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet...s_quantization) and found that if monopoles existed then charges would be quantized. Charges are in fact quantized so the mathematics alone don't rule out monopoles.

Wrong again. Maxwell's Equations only describe the forces associated with charge and magnetism. They don't say anything about the structure of these things nor posit a theory about how they work.
I'm not going to argue about monopoles. However, science has offered a much clearer idea of what a monopole is then you have in defining a deity. Nothing in your description allows a natural explanation.
The question you should be entertaining is, since science has never confirmed anything supernatural, why is it reasonable to even posit a supernatural beginning?
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.

Last edited by acbytesla; Today at 09:36 PM.
acbytesla is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:41 PM   #1142
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 65,439
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
Do you need me to spam you with links?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrono...f_the_universe

ETA: And jesus, did you just use a quote by Isaac Newton to justify your claim that we know nothing about the universe? Isaac ******* Newton? You do realise that we've learned a few new things in the last four hundred years?
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe

Last edited by arthwollipot; Today at 09:43 PM.
arthwollipot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:55 PM   #1143
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,637
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
It fits the Abrahamic God down to a T ("Happy is he who has not seen ..."). So speak for yourself.
Well the bible is full of descriptions of people chatting with their god. And today christians, jews, Muslim’s and other religions pray to their god with the expectation of results or response. Seems you understand religion about as well as you understand physics.

If you want to exchange inane quotes “This is my son in whom I am well pleased”. Seems in that story he came out of hiding in order to say that.

ETA. I always speak for myself.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"

Last edited by Steve; Today at 09:57 PM.
Steve is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:56 PM   #1144
ynot
Philosopher
 
ynot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,500
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
What is so difficult about "we can't rule out a deity in the origins of the universe (at least)" and "we can't scientifically deal with magic"? I see no contradiction here whatsoever.
Provide some evidence an actual deity exists, or even possibly exists, to rule in.

Provide some evidence magic actually exists, or even possibly exists, for anything to deal with.

You see no contradiction because you've been blinded by blind belief.
__________________
Paranormal beliefs are knowledge placebos.
Rumours of a god’s existence have been greatly exaggerated.
Make beliefs truths and you get make-believe truths.
ynot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:03 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.