|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
 Posted - 02/24/2006 : 09:56:15 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
quote:
(bill) Funny how the atheist will lambaste the creationist as a simpleton for giving the attributes of deity to, of all things, a deity and implying that said deity was the uncaused first cause of matter and therefor eternal, but they have no problem what so ever giving the attributes of deity to physical matter and claiming that PM is the uncaused first cause of itself and is therefore totally self sufficient and in need of no god.
Ok then, identify and produce this deity. Drag the bitch out in the light where all can see it, and tell us it's name. Or at least provide evidence of it's existance beyond your less than informed opinion.
Ok then, identify and produce this deity. Drag the bitch out in the light where all can see it, and tell us it's name. Or at least provide evidence of it's existance beyond your less than informed opinion.
(bill) Sure. You want me to stuff him in a mason jar and ship out to your shack for some observation? Or would a digital pic of me with God in headlock work for ya?...
Oh yeah, can you in return, box up some your eternal matter and ship it to me so that I can have the exicement, as well, of waiting for a package from the UPS man
More idiotcy from Bill, even worse than my own. It is to be noted that he again has refused to identify this alledged deity and hurled the red herring as high and far as he could.
But ok. I shall now violate a rule of mine, and risk the ire of the moderators while I'm at it, again, so that he can't possibly miss it.
Bill, as you show a marked aversion, bordering upon the pathological, to opening links, I am posting this paper en toto.
quote:
Chris LaRocco and Blair Rothstein present:
THE BIG BANG:
It sure was BIG!!
The Hubble Telescope's deepest view of the universe teaches us about the beginning
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTRODUCTION
We certainly know that our universe exists, however, this knowledge alone has not satisfied mankind's quest for further understanding. Our curiosity has led us to question our place in this universe and furthermore, the place of the universe itself. Throughout time we have asked ourselves these questions: How did our universe begin? How old is our universe? How did matter come to exist? Obviously, these are not simple questions and throughout our brief history on this planet much time and effort has been spent looking for some clue. Yet, after all this energy has been expended, much of what we know is still only speculation.
We have, however, come a long way from the mystical beginnings of the study of cosmology and the origins of the universe. Through the understandings of modern science we have been able to provide firm theories for some of the answers we once called hypotheses. True to the nature of science, a majority of these answers have only led to more intriguing and complex questions. It seems to be inherent in our search for knowledge that questions will always continue to exist.
Although in this short chapter it will be impossible to tackle all of the questions concerning the creation of everything we know as reality, an attempt will be made to address certain fundamental questions of our being. It will be important to keep in mind that all of this information is constantly being questioned and reevaluated in order to understand the universe more clearly. For our purposes, through an examination of what is known about the Big Bang itself, the age of the universe, and the synthesis of the first atoms, we believe that we can begin to answer several of these key questions.
Most of the text was deleted due to possible copyright infringment. Please use the provided link...
Kil
[quote]So Bill, any unscrambled thoughts on it....?
Ok filthy, I had a chance to read the intro and first 3 paragraphs and it did seem to be an interesting read. I don't have the time at this exact moment to be able to read it all, and then ponder on it for awhile, before discussing. But I promise you that I will read it soon and then we can discuss what we might agree on and what we might not agree on. Fair enough? Have a great Friday sir and we will talk soon. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
 |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2006 : 10:01:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Ok filthy, I had a chance to read the intro and first 3 paragraphs and it did seem to be an interesting read. I don't have the time at this exact moment to be able to read it all, and then ponder on it for awhile, before discussing. But I promise you that I will read it soon and then we can discuss what we might agree on and what we might not agree on. Fair enough? Have a great Friday sir and we will talk soon.
Fair enough. Have a good weekend... 
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
| Edited by - filthy on 02/24/2006 10:03:03 |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9697 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2006 : 10:24:45 [Permalink]
|
Bill, I suggest that you quickly as hell cut and paste that quote to somewhere for later reading before a moderator decides to snip it.
I don't have moderation access to this forum, otherwise I would have already.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2006 : 10:42:08 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Bill, I suggest that you quickly as hell cut and paste that quote to somewhere for later reading before a moderator decides to snip it.
I don't have moderation access to this forum, otherwise I would have already.
cut and paste complete. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
moakley
SFN Regular
USA
1888 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2006 : 11:35:29 [Permalink]
|
Can any one point me to a reference for "Cause and Effect Theory". I did a search on Google and found The Theory of Reciprocity and it talks about the laws of cause and effect. It's just that the first 3 pages of the google search didn't list this theory. I did find the following quote from the "Theory of Reciprocity" interesting.
quote:
Whether portrayed in a theological or secular context, to attribute the presence of the Universe to an event of 'creation' is contrary to logic.
|
Life is good
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2006 : 16:10:59 [Permalink]
|
Moak said:
quote:
Can any one point me to a reference for "Cause and Effect Theory"
There isn't any such theory by that name.
Bill is referring to the cosmological argument for the existance of god when he uses that phrase.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
moakley
SFN Regular
USA
1888 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2006 : 20:42:44 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
Moak said:
quote:
Can any one point me to a reference for "Cause and Effect Theory"
There isn't any such theory by that name.
Bill is referring to the cosmological argument for the existance of god when he uses that phrase.
Thank You.
Somehow I find myself with some time so I searched for "Law of Cause and Effect". Started finding a few links on Budhism of which I found this site to have some rather interesting things to say about a first cause.
quote:
If one posits a 'First Cause' one is justified in asking for the cause of that 'First Cause;' for nothing can escape the law of condition and cause which is patent in the world to all but those who will not see.
I find it accurate and it is the dilemma that Bill faces regardless of whether he is capable of acknowledging it or not.
Anyway, it did lead me to some information that I would not have sought otherwise.
|
Life is good
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2006 : 21:40:04 [Permalink]
|
Dude wrote: There isn't any such theory by that name. (Cause and Effect Theory)
Bill is referring to the cosmological argument for the existance of god when he uses that phrase.
Wrong, Dude. Bill is just calling it the wrong name. It is the law of Causality, and it can be looked up in an encyclopedia. It is a philosophical law, not a scientific law.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 02/24/2006 21:40:21 |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2006 : 21:45:03 [Permalink]
|
Bill wrote: quote:
Funny how the atheist will lambaste the creationist as a simpleton for giving the attributes of deity to, of all things, a deity and implying that said deity was the uncaused first cause of matter and therefor eternal, but they have no problem what so ever giving the attributes of deity to physical matter and claiming that PM is the uncaused first cause of itself and is therefore totally self sufficient and in need of no god. *sigh*
Your entire last post mocked both the scientific ideas of great physicists, including Einstein and Hawking, while providing no actual philosophical refutation of all of our clear explanations of why possibilities #2 and #3 are more logical than your possibility #1. You are indeed an arrogant fool, and I regret wasting so much time giving you the benefit of the doubt.
Thanks, at least, for that life lesson.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 02/24/2006 21:45:26 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2006 : 22:25:15 [Permalink]
|
marfknox said:
quote:
Wrong, Dude. Bill is just calling it the wrong name. It is the law of Causality, and it can be looked up in an encyclopedia. It is a philosophical law, not a scientific law.
No, I'm not wrong.
Bill has repeatedly referred to a "first cause" and directly said that the "first cause" is god, when he refers to "cause and effect theory".
That is the cosmological argument for the existance of god.
Bill, when he refers to "cause and effect theory", is stating that his deity is not constrained by causality. Which is the cosmological argument for the existance of god.
Don't be in such a hurry to jump my shit.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2006 : 22:26:12 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
Funny how the atheist will lambaste the creationist as a simpleton for giving the attributes of deity to, of all things, a deity and implying that said deity was the uncaused first cause of matter and therefor eternal, but they have no problem what so ever giving the attributes of deity to physical matter and claiming that PM is the uncaused first cause of itself and is therefore totally self sufficient and in need of no god. *sigh*
What's funny about it? We know the Universe is here. It exists. Invoking the existence of an unknown entity to explain the origin of the Universe explains nothing because now we are left having to come up with an origin for the unknown entity. If the "solution" to *that* question is just to assume this unknown entity is uncaused, then it makes no sense not to apply that solution to the original problem, and just assume the Universe is uncaused.
Bill, let me put it this way. We know the sky is blue, but not necessarily why it is blue, why light shifts to that hue when filtered through our atmosphere. However, it would make no sense to then use "blue sky fairies" as an explanation for the sky's color, since then we'd have to ask where the fairies get their "blueness" from. If the only solution to that problem is to say that the fairies' blueness "just is," then we can leave out the unevidence part and say the sky "just is" blue.
Making up mysterious beings with properties which defy logic are not explantions! It is a simple-minded exercise, bill. Only a fool finds such answers satisfying.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 02/24/2006 22:27:02 |
|
|
|
Hawks
SFN Regular
Canada
1383 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2006 : 23:37:54 [Permalink]
|
| The first cause of the universe was LIEs. Statistical deviations around the mean produced the LIEs. |
METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL
It's a small, off-duty czechoslovakian traffic warden! |
|
|
|
Hawks
SFN Regular
Canada
1383 Posts |
Posted - 02/25/2006 : 00:56:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Scott
The universe exists, I think most of us will agree to that.
On average, no, it doesn't.
|
METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL
It's a small, off-duty czechoslovakian traffic warden! |
|
|
|
THoR
Skeptic Friend
USA
151 Posts |
Posted - 02/25/2006 : 16:56:33 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by moakley
Can any one point me to a reference for "Cause and Effect Theory". I did a search on Google and found The Theory of Reciprocity and it talks about the laws of cause and effect. It's just that the first 3 pages of the google search didn't list this theory. I did find the following quote from the "Theory of Reciprocity" interesting.
quote:
Whether portrayed in a theological or secular context, to attribute the presence of the Universe to an event of 'creation' is contrary to logic.
Conventional wisdom has concluded the Universe must have come from somewhere, and the idea that it was ushered into being by some primordial nascent event appeals seductively to human intuition. The very process of thought is governed by the rules cause and effect, so scholars instinctively presume the cosmos 'began' with an instance of creation. But is the phenomenon of being the result of a process - is it the product of cause and effect?
How do you explain the physical presence of the Universe?
The existence of nothing ostensibly requires no justification, so most popular theories of Universal origin begin with a primal void. At the beginning of time a transformation must have occurred which brought forth the material presence of the cosmos. Contemporary astronomers espouse a Theory of Singularity - or Big Bang - which envisions a Universe cast from the bowels of some spontaneous cosmic eruption. Theologists would have us believe an omnipotent deity gave birth to the heavens and the earth. But either contention would require the pre-existence of a spawning force - the very presence of which would violate the original assertion that nothing existed. And if all which exists was created, then whatever sired the Universe must, too, have been created by some predecessor which, in turn, must have been predated by a limitless procession of ancestry. The endless cycle of chicken-and-the-egg redundancy which results from any cause and effect approach to the enigma of existence implies no logical beginning.
Supernatural versions of creation sidestep the issue of redundancy by declaring that whatever created the Universe was not subject to the laws of nature. Of course when the rules of reality are suspended anything is possible, even the absurd. And if one such exemption can be conceded, so can others - without limit.
The process of change is always explained in terms of cause and effect - action and reaction. Conditions or states of being change during the process of cause and effect. But existence is not a condition or a state of being, it is the phenomenon of being, itself. Before something can change, before something can act or be acted upon it must first exist. And if being is required in order for change to occur then cause and effect is a function of existence. This is, of course, the antithesis of the premise that existence is a function of cause and effect - the product of creation.
quote:
Whether portrayed in a theological or secular context, to attribute the presence of the Universe to an event of 'creation' is contrary to logic.
|
I would procrastinate but I never seem to get around to it. |
| Edited by - THoR on 02/25/2006 16:57:44 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/25/2006 : 21:41:27 [Permalink]
|
Well said, THoR.
And welcome to the SFN!
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
