Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Douglas Rhiner
Mountain climber
Good question?!?!?!?!?
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 12:26pm PT
|
Complain about but yet start the Circle Jerk!
You must really like 'em.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 12:31pm PT
|
Oh for Christ's sake.
|
|
brotherbbock
Trad climber
Alta Loma, CA
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 12:34pm PT
|
HA HAH HA!!!
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 12:55pm PT
|
Using logic to prove God exists? So less faith is needed?
Science requires no faith. If you think it does, then you are extending it to areas it does not belong.
|
|
Chinchen
climber
Anacortes, wa
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 01:09pm PT
|
Ghey thread.
|
|
brotherbbock
Trad climber
Alta Loma, CA
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 01:21pm PT
|
Monolith,
Science is based upon facts that have been built on other facts. Yet at a certain point you reach a place where we cannot explain what we observe with facts.
Can YOU explain the entire time line of the Big Bang for the evolution of our universe?
We can measure and predict gravitational movement of objects but, can YOU explain what actually causes gravity to have the properties that it does?
Instead we are building bigger and badder particle accelerators to find new theorized exotic particles that we have never observed, but yet we have faith that they do exist.
Is technology the limiting factor of science, or is it the fact we are trapped inside this expanding universe and cannot get a true look at the nature and makeup of all this energy we observe around us?
|
|
WandaFuca
Social climber
From the gettin place
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 01:34pm PT
|
1. Just because of our experience of causation we can't necessarily extrapolate that to the early universe or big bang.
2. If there was a primary cause, we do not all agree that it was "god"; whatever "it" was, this argument says nothing of its nature other than being some event; it demonstrates nothing about omnipotence, omniscience, benevolence, etc.--"it" was a big bang.
|
|
ontos
Trad climber
Washington DC
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 01:36pm PT
|
3 and 7 are contradictory or 4 is false. Argument fail. Theologians should stick to making things up and leave the logics to serious people.
|
|
WandaFuca
Social climber
From the gettin place
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 01:52pm PT
|
What caused god?
The argument rules out miracles, since miracles are noncaused events.
Maybe the universe is cyclical, with no beginning and end. Perhaps the universe has always been here, and so there was no beginning.
We cannot know if time has a beginning, middle, and end.
Perhaps there is no time; time is an illusion. So there is no gap between cause and effect.
An infinite god isn't any more reasonable than an infinite regression.
If a god did cause the universe then he is finite (not omnipotent), as much as the universe is finite since causes are proportional to effects.
The argument is nothing but holes; there is no there there.
Sad when a person in 2010 tries to support his superstitions by relying on medieval scholastic philosophy.
|
|
brotherbbock
Trad climber
Alta Loma, CA
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 01:57pm PT
|
Wanda,
At least you admit there are things that are unexplainable and we cannot know with conventional scientific methods.
|
|
kbstuffnpuff
Sport climber
State of Confusion
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 01:58pm PT
|
Am I way too high- or does this thread actually exist?
I'm having a bad trip, I think.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 01:58pm PT
|
Wanda wrote-
"this argument says nothing of its nature"
-damn straight.
Brother b wrote-
"At least you admit there are things that are unexplainable and we cannot know..."
Yeah, it's called the supernal. A first step toward Higher Enlightment is to distinguish between the supernal and the supernatural. Big difference. Big.
|
|
brotherbbock
Trad climber
Alta Loma, CA
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 02:00pm PT
|
kb,
Yeah this sh#t is annoying as hell to read everyday. Hence my obnoxious thread title.
At least it is a good way to waste time.
And lastly......we don't need to label these threads as OT anymore, since this is what the Taco has degraded to.
|
|
brotherbbock
Trad climber
Alta Loma, CA
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 02:12pm PT
|
Yo Pate.... I have said nothing about my particular religious views at all.
Whether there is a God, or whether everything is just random, I hope either way the universe causes us to meet face to face one day.
You have led a pathetic life....and care way to much about others lives, and what they post online.
Blow me old man.
|
|
Binks
climber
Uranus
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 02:13pm PT
|
This universe is all energy. Therefore it can be conceived of as information. Therefore it is a virtual universe. Thus it could have been programmed and could have an entry point in another Universe. That Universe could have completely different laws. That Universe could also be a virtual universe.
i.e.
Eventually we may create virtual universes with this universe is the entry point. Since this Universe is all energy\information the creation of a new Universe comprised of energy\information would be indistinguishable from this one yet can have totally different rules and laws. That Universe itself may spawn new virtual universes.
It is highly unlikely if this is a mechanistic universe comprised of energy that it is a real universe. The real universe might not even exist, or could exist in a vastly different state and set of rules.
The highest work of art is the creation of a Universe. If this Universe has no God, we will probably eventually create a new virtual Universe that has one or many or whatever. If this one has a God, we will probably create a new Virtual universe that does not have one just to see how it turns out. Or even if this Universe does not have a God, the Universe that spawned it may have one. We do not really know why this one we inhabit was created. Every sort of Universe that can be conceived can be created and does\has or will exist. And even ones where there is no time.
There are no limits, or if there are we probably cannot ascertain what they are since this entire Universe is probably just a subset of another one ad infinitum.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 02:18pm PT
|
The material Universe is real although temporary ......
|
|
brotherbbock
Trad climber
Alta Loma, CA
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 02:22pm PT
|
Binks,
Thank you for admitting science falls short of explaining everything.
|
|
Binks
climber
Uranus
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 02:24pm PT
|
The problem with the Matrix is it gave way too much credence to a real "reality". Waking up in the pod could have been itself a virtual reality. That would have been the best twist. For neo to find out that his "waking up" was just another virtual experience. The whole idea of Zion etc was also a virtual reality.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 02:24pm PT
|
Bbock- Join Gobee and Klimmer. Nobody in science claims this.
|
|
Binks
climber
Uranus
|
|
|
May 24, 2010 - 02:25pm PT
|
brotherbblock, it's not something I had to admit. Science may have nothing do with the building blocks of this Universe in my honest opinion.
My real point is. Everything exists or can exist since reality is probably virtual and parallel universes probably exists ad infinitum. Any kind of Universe we want will\does\did probably exist. Creating virtual Universes is probably something that has been done and ours is in fact a likely candidate. It seem highly unlikely to me that this Universe is "the beginning point" of all the other ones.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!